part p prosecution

[Phil]

well this is going to put everyone off NOT. £300 fine £150 costs and £15 victim surcharge???????? what the heck. it`s cheaper than an annual assessment and less hassle.
madness

 

[Johno]

Unbelievable, what a farce this law really is!

 

[Phil]

£15 victim surcharge?? he would have got 100x that amount if the builder had of bumped his car for a sore neck. now i am not supporting our cultre of lets sue everyone but come on if you had got a belt in your kitchen because of dodgy electrics from an unqualified and non competent person you would have been wanting a little more than 15 quid because i know i would

 

[amberleaf]

Good Post Phil . [ Not in the Sense Part P. Prosecution the Book should have got ----ed at Him. ]
I Agree with Johno . Unbelievable . Full Stop . PS this Put’s my Faith back into the Law . Yeah ??

Q) Lenny what’s faster than Broadband . Phil’s Typing

 

[Sintra]

That sucks but the laugh of it is it is us that has to fork out the bill for the year long court case.

 

[amberleaf]

Your Right Sintra . The Law in this Country needs Re-Writing Like Yesterday !!

 

[Sintra]

100% agree amber.

 

[Spudnik]

So how did this bit work then?

"He was found not guilty of one charge of failing to comply with Part P of the building regulations."

 

[Sparky Ninja]

So how did this bit work then?

"He was found not guilty of one charge of failing to comply with Part P of the building regulations."

Same here, baffling???

 

[Phil]

? it`s bizarre. i reckon a few will see as a risk worth taking if that amount is all they are likely to get given if caught.

 

[Goody]

The article ends as follows:

"When a hazardous situation is created because the regulations are ignored, we will find the people responsible and prosecute.
"Everyone should make sure that electrical installations are carried out by a qualified electrician or competent person."

Does this mean, the electrical installer need to be qualified but not necessarily registered as a competent person? Is this a kind of loophole?

 

[Phil]

i think they are meaning that a qualified electrician would be able to inform bc before and go down that route

 

[Spudnik]

The article ends as follows:

"When a hazardous situation is created because the regulations are ignored, we will find the people responsible and prosecute.
"Everyone should make sure that electrical installations are carried out by a qualified electrician or competent person."

Does this mean, the electrical installer need to be qualified but not necessarily registered as a competent person? Is this a kind of loophole?

Not wanting to upset anyone, it is a bit of a loophole.

One way of proving competency is via quals & membership, but that is not a legal requirement.

 

[La Poste]

Not wanting to upset anyone, it is a bit of a loophole.
One way of proving competency is via quals & membership, but that is not a legal requirement.

Or possibly under cross examination at court. If you appear competant under questioning.
It's obvious from this that policng of part P is virtually non-existant.
They rely on grassing and grassing is very un-English

 

[nickblake]

could open the link will try later , im sure its this country , look at the guy that sprayed his kid with cold water for 90 mins suspend sentance ,whats all that about ,suspended why bother giving a sentance its a load of old liyhfiyadflivgyadflival