testing other electricians work

[MTI]

Hello can anyone help. I have an nvq lvl 3 and am looking to start up on my own. Am i able to do any testing without doing 2391/2392. Also what do you need to qualify for part p.
Regards Tom

check out elecsa website etc. im in same boat. i dont have 2391 either. elecsa website etc explains all. you have to be competant in installation, testing and filling certs. as per bs7671 sates a competant person. some scheme providers also offer part scope to kitchen fitters etc. hope this helps mate. call them up. the can be friendly if they think they are getting your cash! they told me they want to inspect two jobs. these can be an extra socket or light to 'something bigger'. i asked 'bigger' ? they said yes, preferably a garage supply or something. maybe new bathroom circuits.

 

[electricAl]

I am not saying that, but that was what the LABC here told me.

Explicitly, that a JIB graded Electrician OR an NIC member (but none Competent Person) could carry out the work under a £86 Building Notice application, & they would accept their competence on receipt of a completed EIC.

Trouble is a) what they say one day they often retract another.
& b) what this LABC practice others may not.

Just looked & the page is still current Telford & Wrekin Council

follow the link to Schedule 2 part 8 for more info on requirements.

Hope it helps you (altho sadly i suspect it`ll frustrate you even more)

 

[Richard Andrews]

Its down to the LABC to arrange inspecting and testing, although do like to try and dump this onto the client.

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/734995.pdf

page 33-34 para 4.5

By Electrical regs i would think they mean EAWR, of which BS7671 is one way to comply.
BS7671 does not have to be complied with, in some cases an engineering decision has to be made, there is no problem with this as long as you can prove what you did was safe.

But Building Regs do have to be complied with! We are talking about Part P specifically - not comercial or industrial works.

Part P General Guidence 0

The Secretary of State's view, the requirements will be met by adherence to the 'FundamentaL Principles' given in BS7671/2001 Chapter 13...

The following General Section goes on to stipulate Electrical Regs & the IEE's On-site guide...

Electrical Regs are the bible for us sparkys, but the Secretary Of State has made them law via the Building Regs and adherence to BS7671 in Part P.

Would you all agree with this? Now throw in EAWR and other Health & Safety legislation/guidence to support a court action against a person who has thrown some cables into your ageing mothers home where mcb's are tripping, lamps are only lasting 5 minutes.... You would take the guilty party to court for non-compliance with building regs - a criminal matter I believe (as opposed to a civil matter).

 

[Jono Pashley]

But Building Regs do have to be complied with! We are talking about Part P specifically - not comercial or industrial works.

Part P General Guidence 0

The Secretary of State's view, the requirements will be met by adherence to the 'FundamentaL Principles' given in BS7671/2001 Chapter 13...

The following General Section goes on to stipulate Electrical Regs & the IEE's On-site guide...

Electrical Regs are the bible for us sparkys, but the Secretary Of State has made them law via the Building Regs and adherence to BS7671 in Part P.

Would you all agree with this? Now throw in EAWR and other Health & Safety legislation/guidence to support a court action against a person who has thrown some cables into your ageing mothers home where mcb's are tripping, lamps are only lasting 5 minutes.... You would take the guilty party to court for non-compliance with building regs - a criminal matter I believe (as opposed to a civil matter).

Its still a none statutory document, just because BS7671 has not been followed to the letter doers not in any way mean the installation is unsafe, the requirement to follow BS7671 set out in the building regs isnt an absolute regulation. Why do you think your test certs have a departures section? Because in some cases even in domestic work you are going to have to provide a solution that isnt in the regs but after careful consideration and assessment you have found to be equally as safe.

 

[8181piv]

My local council will accept PIR for the installation, as long as the person carrying out the work holds Third Party Professional Indemnity Insurance.

 

[Richard Andrews]

Its still a none statutory document, just because BS7671 has not been followed to the letter doers not in any way mean the installation is unsafe, the requirement to follow BS7671 set out in the building regs isnt an absolute regulation. Why do you think your test certs have a departures section? Because in some cases even in domestic work you are going to have to provide a solution that isnt in the regs but after careful consideration and assessment you have found to be equally as safe.

Departure duly noted and recorded. Cable routing that is physically impossible to achieve, hence noted on departures. I would also provide a digital image atteched to the EIT cert to ensure there was no misuderstanding and such would be affixed adjacent to CU.

The Building Act 1984... I believe this is the statutory tool that make Building Regs the law and give power to building control?

 

[johnhainsby]

hi mark i have been asked many times if i would sign off other persons work i dont think it is worth getting involved with it as someone else has made a profit out of the job and all you have got is stress,remember when you sign that certificate you are liable for their work,you just dont know what bodges they have done,these may not come to light for a few years,and then they come after you.regards john

 

[angrywelshman]

Answer to this is it is not "illegal" but it is not advisable. I used to work for a large company and somtimes several guys would carry out the installation work. Since the certificate only allows design, construction and inspection signatures, it is impossible for everyone to sign for their own individual parts. So one person ends up oversigning the construction. The best thing to do is to contact the original installer for the work and obtain a certificate. If they cannot provide one (and they shouldn't be doing the work if they can't issue certificates), carry out a periodic report for the work with no certificate, as this should suffice for any insurance purposes.

 

[markythesparky]

My local council will accept PIR for the installation, as long as the person carrying out the work holds Third Party Professional Indemnity Insurance.

in this case they are plainly breaking the law. Approved Document Part P of the building regulations states in section 1.29 that :

'a third party could only sign a Periodic Inspection and Report or similar. The report would indicate that electrical satefy tests had been carried out on the installation which met BS7671 but it could not verify that the installation complied fully with BS7671 requirements, for example with regard to routing of hidden cables.'

Therefore a PIR is NOT suitable and cannot certify that the installation meets PART P requirements.

i would seriously consider writing to this council.

 

[rob1967]

in this case they are plainly breaking the law. Approved Document Part P of the building regulations states in section 1.29 that :

'a third party could only sign a Periodic Inspection and Report or similar. The report would indicate that electrical satefy tests had been carried out on the installation which met BS7671 but it could not verify that the installation complied fully with BS7671 requirements, for example with regard to routing of hidden cables.'

Therefore a PIR is NOT suitable and cannot certify that the installation meets PART P requirements.

i would seriously consider writing to this council.

But surely a PIR is done to find out if the installation is safe (satisfactory or not ) and if not what work needs to be done to make it safe, and then it's up to the customer weather they have the work carried out by you or someone else.................. Probably 90% of all houses and flats in the uk would fail the Part P requirments as they stand now but that still wouldn't mean they are unsafe.................Part P apply's to all new work that is notifiable i:e new circuit etc.etc.......... but does not apply to replacing fittings or cables like for like.........Lets say you are replacing a fitting in a house (socket say) how would you know if that circuit your fitting a replacement socket to meets the requirments of Part P????? if you replace a cabe like for like then you have to run them throught the same route as the old one which might not meet the requirments of Part P........this is unnotifiable work..........Just dont make sense

 

[Spudnik]

Now you can begin to understand the mess that we are in, as when Part P was brought in, it really wasnt thought through properly, although it had been on the cards for a few years before.

It was the death of the MP's daughter (i think) that pushed it in, in a hurry.

 

[Jono Pashley]

so maybe if we fry a few actual MPs we should start to see some proper results????

(Might be entertaining regardless!)

 

[markythesparky]

Now were talkin'

 

[Doomed]

It was the death of the MP's daughter (i think) that pushed it in, in a hurry.

correct:

BBC NEWS | Politics | Coroner verdict on MP's daughter

http://www.monmouthshire.gov.uk/downloads/Final_Guidance_Note_on_Part_P.pdf

 

[andekoch]

I would use the 3 signature version of the form and only sign the test section then get the home owner to contact the council and submit the job as a "late notification" or whatever the particlual council likes to call it. That way you are only saying that the test results show it is safe or not as the case may be. The building inspector then makes the call as to how to proceed with it meeting the regulations. In all likely hood he will phone you for your opinion in whic case you can only comment on what you have seen (sort of like a PIR) so be specific.