Part P

[Guest77]

It is a Building regulation, thats right a Building regulation, not a Electrical qualification. If you read it (you can download it on-line) then you will see that some works, and only some as it is getting less now needs to be notified to the local building control. Now there is nothing to suggest an Electrician need notify the local building control authority, nothing at all anywhere, this is a myth, and a myth we are all getting fed up with. The customer is duty bound to do this just like if they decided to have a loft conversion or indeed a extension on their home. To be competitive some electricians join a scheme so they can notify for the customer on their behalf and the fees are usually a couple of quid instead of the 2-300 the local authority would charge the customer if an Electrician didn't do it for them, this way the customer gets to save some money and the Electrician wins work. The schemes have a policy which they suggest if they get people to join them they will guarentee to the local authority the people they approve are competant, for this privilage they take 400-500 off these people, usually Electricians, but some Plumbers and Kitchen Fitters join as well, The local authority building control then accepts the fact the people on these schemes are competant and do not go out to site to inspect the works, this is why the cost is just an administrative one at a few quid and not hundreds. If you are a competant Electrician for example with a Gold card and plenty of experience why do you need to pay a scheme hundreds of pounds a year to have them tell the Local authority you are competant? If you are Competant then get stuck in and start work. If the work you do does need to be notified then you can ask the customer to do it or include an extra couple of hundred on top of your quote for you to do it. There is no judge in the whole of the UK who will find you guilty of anything wrong doing if you carry out work to BS7671 correctly without being a member of a scheme, we don't need them do we? so why are we paying them 500 a year? I can confirm I no longer pay them, I have left the NICEIC, I am competant, I have over 30 years experience, I will not give them 500 quid to tell someone else I am competant.


Please do not keep going on about being part p qualified, it is all Rollocks, rant over.

 

[trev]

If I were to register with a CPS I have to have someone (probably younger and less experienced than me) to visit to tell me that, after nigh on 35 years experience and constant updating of qualifications, I'm on the same level as some former IT bloke/shelf stacker who only holds a bit of paper that proves he can read a book and find things in it.
And you see nothing wrong with that?
It is a well documented fact (unless you're Emma Clancy) that the r£gulatory bodies will allow anyone with a chequebook to join their organisation and wear the "badge of competency" with some degree of pride.
If there was no need to join the discredited club, how many real sparks do you think would do it?

 

[trev]

so what you were originally saying was wrong then.

You're actually recommending people do this because they're unlikely to get caught, not because there isn't a law that says they should notify building control themselves if they're doing work.

If that's your position then it's a valid opinion, but let's not mislead people into thinking they don't actually have a legal responsibility to do something when they clearly do.

No, I'm not wrong. I'm replying to a post and pointing out that there have been few if any prosecutions for non notification of electrical work.
One thing I am an advocate of is a programme of (for want of a much more appropriate phrase) civil disobedience to bring the CPSs down. My views on the subject are well known on here

 

[Geoffsd]

Who is responsible for notifying other building works? Planning permission for example.

The home owner or the builder?

 

[Gavin A]

No, I'm not wrong. I'm replying to a post and pointing out that there have been few if any prosecutions for non notification of electrical work.
One thing I am an advocate of is a programme of (for want of a much more appropriate phrase) civil disobedience to bring the CPSs down. My views on the subject are well known on here

this statement right here is wrong.

Sorry but you're wrong, it is the responsibility of the homeowner to ensure notifiable works are notified.

You were claiming that the electrician doing the work has no legal responsibility to ensure building control are notified / building control permission is obtained, which is clearly not the case.

If you want to make a separate argument about the likelihood of being prosecuted, then go right ahead, but let's nail this point about whether or not there is a legal responsibility for the tradesperson to notify building control first, as it's a pretty important distinction.

Here are a few legal precedents for you, which pretty clearly demonstrate that the electrician is responsible for the notifications.

At an earlier hearing, the electrician had pleaded guilty to two other offences of not making a Building Regulations Application to the Council prior to commencement of the work, and not giving the Council the required 48 hours’ notice prior to its commencement.

He was fined £1,000 for the Part P offence and £250 each for the remaining two offences. The other two offences were that Mr Drinkwater failed to give a Building Notice to the Council prior to commencement of the work and he failed to give notice of commencement and completion of certain stages of the work.

Waugh admitted to 23 offences including falsely claiming to be registered with the NICEIC, failing to notify work to Building Control, installing cables under the landing floor in a poor manner, using old wires which are no longer covered by current regulations and not using Residual Circuit Breakers for sockets.

Electrician Fined for Part P breach | Options Skills Ltd
IET Forums - Part P Prosecutions

 

[snowhead]

Who is responsible for notifying other building works? Planning permission for example.

The home owner or the builder?

The responsibility for all Building regs notifications is with the Home owner.
Enforcement action is taken against the home (building) owner.

From the Planning Portal;

Responsibility for compliance

It is important to remember that if you are the
person (e.g. designer, builder, installer) carrying
out building work to which any requirement
of Building Regulations applies you have a
responsibility to ensure that the work complies
with any such requirement. The building
owner may also have a responsibility for
ensuring compliance with Building Regulation
requirements and could be served with an

enforcement notice in cases of non-compliance.

 

[Gavin A]

The responsibility for all Building regs notifications is with the Home owner.
Enforcement action is taken against the home (building) owner.

From the Planning Portal;

if you are the
person (e.g. designer, builder, installer) carrying
out building work to which any requirement
of Building Regulations applies you have a
responsibility to ensure that the work complies
with any such requirement.

have you even read that quote, it clearly says that the person carrying out the work is responsible in the first sentence.

 

[SparkyJoe]

Paragraphs are a bloody brilliant invention, you should give them a try.

It is a Building regulation, thats right a Building regulation, not a Electrical qualification. If you read it (you can download it on-line) then you will see that some works, and only some as it is getting less now needs to be notified to the local building control. Now there is nothing to suggest an Electrician need notify the local building control authority, nothing at all anywhere, this is a myth, and a myth we are all getting fed up with. The customer is duty bound to do this just like if they decided to have a loft conversion or indeed a extension on their home. To be competitive some electricians join a scheme so they can notify for the customer on their behalf and the fees are usually a couple of quid instead of the 2-300 the local authority would charge the customer if an Electrician didn't do it for them, this way the customer gets to save some money and the Electrician wins work. The schemes have a policy which they suggest if they get people to join them they will guarentee to the local authority the people they approve are competant, for this privilage they take 400-500 off these people, usually Electricians, but some Plumbers and Kitchen Fitters join as well, The local authority building control then accepts the fact the people on these schemes are competant and do not go out to site to inspect the works, this is why the cost is just an administrative one at a few quid and not hundreds. If you are a competant Electrician for example with a Gold card and plenty of experience why do you need to pay a scheme hundreds of pounds a year to have them tell the Local authority you are competant? If you are Competant then get stuck in and start work. If the work you do does need to be notified then you can ask the customer to do it or include an extra couple of hundred on top of your quote for you to do it. There is no judge in the whole of the UK who will find you guilty of anything wrong doing if you carry out work to BS7671 correctly without being a member of a scheme, we don't need them do we? so why are we paying them 500 a year? I can confirm I no longer pay them, I have left the NICEIC, I am competant, I have over 30 years experience, I will not give them 500 quid to tell someone else I am competant.


Please do not keep going on about being part p qualified, it is all Rollocks, rant over.

 

[Andy78]

Are they mange tout on the floor to the right of the trap.

They look like the leaves from an olive tree

 

[trev]

Directly lifted from Approved Document P
"Most building works and material changes of use must be notified to a building control body unless one of the following applies-
A ) It is work that will be self certified by a registered competent person or certified by a registered third party"
I've just read through the rest of it and there is nothing in there that suggests to me that the installer has any other obligation than to test and certify the installation and to hand copies of that paperwork to anyone other than the person who ordered the work to be carried out

 

[snowhead]

have you even read that quote, it clearly says that the person carrying out the work is responsible in the first sentence.

It states, Has a Responsibility to comply, doesn't state has a liability or obligation to notify

 

[Gavin A]

some seem to cling to part P like its a grail or something....

if you want to launch a campaign of civil disobedience against something you disagree with, then go right ahead.

Just don't do it by tricking people into joining that civil disobedience campaign by telling them that what you want them to do isn't illegal when it clearly is - that would be a ****s trick, and I'd hoped that you were all better than that.

ps speaking as someone who ran police liason for dozens of raves, and proper direct action protests including one that the state put 12,000 coppers up against (including several long term undercovers), I've no objection to actually taking direct action against a law that's wrong, just against tricking people into doing something that has the potential to see them end up prosecuted if the establishment decided to crack down on those who were causing them grief (which is usually what happens eventually IME).

 

[Gavin A]

Directly lifted from Approved Document P
"Most building works and material changes of use must be notified to a building control body unless one of the following applies-
A ) It is work that will be self certified by a registered competent person or certified by a registered third party"
I've just read through the rest of it and there is nothing in there that suggests to me that the installer has any other obligation than to test and certify the installation and to hand copies of that paperwork to anyone other than the person who ordered the work to be carried out

I linked to the part in the actual building regulations legislation earlier, as well as quoting it directly.

 

[Gavin A]

It states, Has a Responsibility to comply, doesn't state has a liability or obligation to notify

the notification is a requirement of the building regulations that it's stating that the person carrying out the work has a responsibility to comply with.

And what do you think that the phrase 'responsibility to comply' means in terms of a web page offering advice on interpreting legislation?

it means that you're legally responsible for ensuring that all applicable building regulations are complied with, and as with most laws, if you fail to comply then you can face prosecution for that failure.

This is getting a bit tedious now. No matter how this point is argued, the facts wont change, you as the tradesperson are responsible for the notification of building control, as clearly stated in the act, and confirmed by the case law I've already given where people who weren't the building owner have been prosecuted for this.

 

[Geoffsd]

Does this help?

Read the first bit and then scroll down a little way to Local Authority Building Control/

Planning Portal - Electrics

 

[trev]

Lots of uses of the words "You should" and "Your home" etc. Seems pretty clear cut to me, I'd suggest the case notes presented above were more relevant to the installer falsely claiming to be a CPS member and not fulfilling the duties that would be reasonably expected of one.

 

[Gavin A]

Does this help?

Read the first bit and then scroll down a little way to Local Authority Building Control/

Planning Portal - Electrics

If you are carrying out electrical work in your home or garden in England and Wales, you will have to follow new rules in the Building Regulations.

[h=2]Disclaimer[/h]This is an introductory guide and is not a definitive source of legal information.

Not really, it's an introductory guide aimed at the home owner, not at the tradesman involved, therefore it's focussed on the home owner's responsibilities.

 

[Silly Sausage]

It mildly amuses me, that if you pay LABC to certify any work, they can only issue an EICR, not an EIC. see page 10.
Not much difference to 3rd Party Notification then!

 

[Manutd4life]

have you even read that quote, it clearly says that the person carrying out the work is responsible in the first sentence.

Complies too, not notifys

 

[GLENNSPARK]

if you want to launch a campaign of civil disobedience against something you disagree with, then go right ahead.

Just don't do it by tricking people into joining that civil disobedience campaign by telling them that what you want them to do isn't illegal when it clearly is - that would be a ****s trick, and I'd hoped that you were all better than that.

ps speaking as someone who ran police liason for dozens of raves, and proper direct action protests including one that the state put 12,000 coppers up against (including several long term undercovers), I've no objection to actually taking direct action against a law that's wrong, just against tricking people into doing something that has the potential to see them end up prosecuted if the establishment decided to crack down on those who were causing them grief (which is usually what happens eventually IME).

eh?....

 

[GLENNSPARK]

if you want to launch a campaign of civil disobedience against something you disagree with, then go right ahead.

Just don't do it by tricking people into joining that civil disobedience campaign by telling them that what you want them to do isn't illegal when it clearly is - that would be a ****s trick, and I'd hoped that you were all better than that.

ps speaking as someone who ran police liason for dozens of raves, and proper direct action protests including one that the state put 12,000 coppers up against (including several long term undercovers), I've no objection to actually taking direct action against a law that's wrong, just against tricking people into doing something that has the potential to see them end up prosecuted if the establishment decided to crack down on those who were causing them grief (which is usually what happens eventually IME).

hark at this one....lol....lol..

he chunters on about "civil disobedience".....lol...heard it all now....lol.....

 

[GLENNSPARK]

whats all this about the state as well....having a Part P crackdown?....lol...

 

[Gavin A]

Lots of uses of the words "You should" and "Your home" etc. Seems pretty clear cut to me

so you'll be standing up in court as an expert witness on the defence side for the first forum members to be prosecuted if they decide to crack down on this will you?

and in your expert witness statement will you be referencing a guide that specifically states that it's an introductory guide for homeowners, and not a definitive source of legal information?

Do as you will, but don't say that nobody attempted to put you right on this if / when it all goes horribly wrong.

What do you think the first thing the CPS schemes will do if they find they're losing significant numbers of members because of this campaign? Work with council building control and trading standards to launch prosecutions against those who're breaking the rules would be my educated guess.

, I'd suggest the case notes presented above were more relevant to the installer falsely claiming to be a CPS member and not fulfilling the duties that would be reasonably expected of one.

They were obviously prosecuted because of other more serious breaches, but the fact remains that among the charges they were prosecuted for were "failure to give a Building Notice to the Council prior to commencement of the work and he failed to give notice of commencement and completion of certain stages of the work"


They couldn't have been prosecuted for those failures if they didn't have a legal responsibility to notify building control in the first place.


Other than quoting the relevant legislation, and the guidance within that legislation, and relevant case law to prove my point, what other evidence would you need to see before accepting that you'd got this wrong?

 

[trev]

hark at this one....lol....lol..

he chunters on about "civil disobedience".....lol...heard it all now....lol.....

Let's be fair Glenn, it was me who first used the phrase on this thread mate. So if you need someone to blame or point and laugh at....
Over here mate

 

[trev]

So what do we do to fight the malaise within the trade Gavin?
Just sit down and let the likes of Emma Clancy tickle our tummys?

It's the scams that have caused this mess that we're faced with now mate, and everyone who continues to pay them is complicit as far as I'm concerned.

They need electricians, electricians don't need them.

 

[Gavin A]

hark at this one....lol....lol..

he chunters on about "civil disobedience".....lol...heard it all now....lol.....

Tony and others are calling for sparks to break the law in order to make a point.

Civil disobedience is the active, professed refusal to obey certain laws, demands, or commands of a government,

Except that Tony's trying to make out that they wouldn't actually be breaking the law when they clearly would.

 

[amckay]

The responsibility for all Building regs notifications is with the Home owner.
Enforcement action is taken against the home (building) owner.

From the Planning Portal;

if you are the
person (e.g. designer, builder, installer) carrying
out building work to which any requirement
of Building Regulations applies you have a
responsibility to ensure that the work complies
with any such requirement.

have you even read that quote, it clearly says that the person carrying out the work is responsible in the first sentence.

GavinA I think you need to re-read that.
First sentance is all you need to know.

 

[GLENNSPARK]

i think the whole chuffin thing`s crap...

as if theres a Part P police going round...lol..

listen Gavin:

no-one gives two shytes about Part P police...or a council snooper....or anything else like that for that matter....

and has anyone ever been prosicuted for not notifying the bank of LABC?

has anyone been dealt with for installing down rite dangerous crap...the likes of which we see pics of in here regularly?

and all this about how the state may decide to `crack down`....crack down on what exactly?...folks doing their work?...getting on with their lives?

has anyone thought that society generally tends to police itself?

....the people generally know the difference between right & wrong...

 

[Silly Sausage]

i think the whole chuffin thing`s crap...

as if theres a Part P police going round...lol..

listen Gavin:

no-one gives two shytes about Part P police...or a council snooper....or anything else like that for that matter....

and has anyone ever been prosicuted for not notifying the bank of LABC?

You showed that APPALLING install that was on here a while back to the NICEIC, didn't you?
I think I remember you saying, they couldn't give a ....

It's a money making game between the schemes and the councils as far as I can see.

 

[GLENNSPARK]

You showed that APPALLING install that was on here a while back to the NICEIC, didn't you?
I think I remember you saying, they couldn't give a ....

It's a money making game between the schemes and the councils as far as I can see.

yes i did...and he didn`t want to know..

the more i got on at him over it...the more irritated he got...

they didn`t want us hanging about front of house at the NIC stand i can tell you now....

 

[Silly Sausage]

What's the line...give the installer a chance to rectify before going further?
Hahahaha...not much chance in that particular case!
Wonder what happened?

 

[Geoffsd]

Not really, it's an introductory guide aimed at the home owner, not at the tradesman involved, therefore it's focussed on the home owner's responsibilities.

Fair enough, and I am the first to slag off 'guides' but surely without a statutory definition of 'who is carrying out the work' if it (the guide) states that is the home owner then what else do we have to go on.

On a practical point, do you think it reasonable to expect the tradespeople to have to notify, with all the associated paperwork and telephone calls, every job they do and was that the intention?


On the court cases, it is not unknown for a court to get it wrong and perhaps they have drawn the same conclusion as you (if you are wrong) or could it be that the reporting was up to the usual standard written by some junior reporter on their first assignment.
We don't know.

This all rests on the definition of 'carrying out'.



As the Building Regulations apply to all parts, why would part P be different?

 

[cprfenom]

At total risk of being lambasted. I'm sure there are some really honest Part P, 17th Edition people who were not really told the full depth of what was required and feel that the course at least opened a door that wasn't there for them before. If all these Part P people want to do is basic electrical works safer than the DIY'er then what is the issue with that? Some people know thier limitations and stick to them.
I've got an Electrician friend who will never join a scheme and hates the way the business has gone, but doesn't rip my head off or call me an idiot for asking a question. He's been in the industry longer than I've been alive and actually enjoys the fact that I ask questions.

I'm honestly scared to ask for anything on here as I am worried people will just assume the worst in me and make me feel like **** for not knowing something.

 

[trev]

I'm honestly scared to ask for anything on here as I am worried people will just assume the worst in me and make me feel like **** for not knowing something.

Mate it all depends on what the question is, I've seen questions on here from people who say "I'm a fully qualified electrician having done the DI course" then go on to ask how to wire a 2 way switch.

 

[UNG]

The whole point is that a properly qualified and competent person should not have to join a club to be told he or she is competent.

We have people who are told they are competent who are not properly qualified

OK lets just clear this ****e up so people understand...... to be " QUALIFIED " you do 3 YEARS {not days} at college and gain your core qualifications preferably whilst working alongside a sparks gaining practical experience !!!!!!!!!!!
NEXT........ do your NVQ3 followed by your AM2 which demonstrates you have carried out a variety of work outlined by city and guilds!!!!!!!!
THEN you apply for your jib card and get graded as an ELECTRICIAN !!!
Now regardless at to whether some of you think the NVQ is a farce and pointless and jib cards are crap this is how it is to be qualified and that is that im afraid like it or not !!!!!
Obviously there are many more qualifications to gain after your NVQ3 is complete but these 4-5 years doing a time served apprenticeship gaining valuable knowledge and experience is the ONLY way to be recognised as a REAL sparky.
Just having a 17th cert = NOT QUALIFIED
PART P BOLOX = NOT QUALIFIED
Just because you did a 5 week course and joined a scheme = NOT QUALIFIED
SIMPLES !!!!!!

Didn't have all this NVQ and AM2 when I finished my apprenticeship but I'm still qualified with plenty of experience

you're joining the club to enable you to self certify and notify the work to building control at in the region of 10% of the cost of making an individual building control application for your work.

While everyone is in a nit picking mood these clubs are competent persons schemes not LABC notification schemes

 

[cprfenom]

That is a valid and fair point Trev. I just felt that some of the bashing on here gets a bit mad and people like me then shy away from it. I love reading the posts on here and I genuinely learn some things.

 

[Silly Sausage]

I'm honestly scared to ask for anything on here as I am worried people will just assume the worst in me and make me feel like **** for not knowing something.

Ah, but if you don't ask, you don't get!

They're just words on an internet forum, don't let any big man talk scare you off.

 

[Guest77]

I have been trying to upload page iv of the document which sets out the notification rules for gavin, but this bleeding site will not let me past and copy anything for some reason, it is quite clear who is responsible and who will face prosecution if the rules are not adhered to, it is the householder who is responsible, I just wish the paste would work, I cannot even send a PM at the moment, the site is broken for me.

 

[GMES]

I have been trying to upload page iv of the document which sets out the notification rules for gavin, but this bleeding site will not let me past and copy anything for some reason, it is quite clear who is responsible and who will face prosecution if the rules are not adhered to, it is the householder who is responsible, I just wish the paste would work, I cannot even send a PM at the moment, the site is broken for me.

Evening Mike, maybe you punctured it with one of your Horns, you need to be careful wher you point them buggers!!

 

[Guest77]

iv
Approved Document P, 2013 edition
Building Regulations 2010
Notification of work

Responsibility for compliance
People who are responsible for building work (for example, the agent, designer, builder or installer)
must ensure that the work complies with all applicable requirements of the Building Regulations.
The building owner may also be responsible for ensuring that work complies with the Building
Regulations. If building work does not comply with the Building Regulations, the building owner may
be served with an enforcement notice

 

[Silly Sausage]

Evening Mike, maybe you punctured it with one of your Horns, you need to be careful wher you point them buggers!!

His wife must have thick skinned thighs!