Too late for building control?

[robsparx]

I may be in a slightly sticky situation. Before i start, i dont reccomend doing what I've done, as i understand it you should ALWAYS notify building control BEFORE you start a job if youre not registered to self certify


I had a rewire thrust upon me a few weeks ago when i was unemployed, so obviously i bit the guys hand off, and got to work straight away. I did'nt really think straight away about how i was going to Part P it.

I have nearly finished it now, and have arranged an ELECSA assessment for early june. But i have since found out that the house is being sold, and the deal is done and they have set the completion date for 2 days after my Part P assessment. So i am understandably more nervous about passing the assessment, and i'm not sure that even if i pass that the client will get the relevant documents in time?

Would it be too late to call out building control and get the to sign it off? The re wire is nearly finished, but its a totally empty house, so i can lift up floorboards etc showing my cable runs, and you can see exactly where i have run cables in the walls.

This is my own fault, i should have got building control involved straight away, even if the client didnt like the sound of the price

 

[IQ Electrical]

I was never a fan of CORGI however they make GAS SAFE seem like rank amateurs. Although it is illegal to work on gas without registration there are next to no checks on an installer once he is in the scheme. Below is an e-mail containing the reply comments from GAS SAFE regarding their ongoing checks on scheme members



Basically once in the scheme if there are no complaints you NEVER get inspected - not what I expected from a CP scheme but apparrently all CP schemes are looking at similar 'risk based' inspection regimes. A good installer on registration can rapidly drop his standards to keep prices down and may never be caught! Is that sort of scheme what you really want?

I think we are using the Gas safe example only as far as a 'single scheme body' rather than having to adopt it's assessment procedures but this is interesting if disturbing information anyway!

 

[alanl]

people understand that Gas is dangerous and it cannot be altered by even the home owners themselves, by law....

This statement is used fairly regularly, but is wrong.
*To do work on your own gas fittings, you must be 'competent'. There is no definition of competent in the regulations. A friend once said to me that if you use a manometer to ensure there are no leaks, and you follow the various regs, then you could be classed as competent to do your own gas work.
*To work for a living doing gas work then by Law, you must be GasSafe registered, but, as with electricians, there are some real bad gas workers out there.

 

[Des 56]

LABCman
You may wish to amend your statement about prosecutions, which is totally wrong, after looking at these links

New building regulations prosecution

Electrician Elgin 01343 569 277 or 07943 179505

We could have died - Chronicle News - News - ChronicleLive

http://www.constructiontrainingservices.co.uk/about/bathroomfitter_prosecution.pdf

You will find many more if you care to take a minute to look, and as a matter of fact prosecutions under Part P outnumber those under the other 14 parts of the building regulations, we recognise the dangers involved are more immediate and less obvious and act firmly accordingly.

Quote from the link
Mr Bond admitted that he was not a qualified electrician and that the electrical installation at the property was left unsafe.I'm not going to copy and paste the others,but each prosecution was for unsafe electrical work

The question I asked you was "How many prosecutions" have been made to persons who does a satisfactory installationand the crime was not notifying ,as far as I am aware, it is definetly a total of none

The reason for the question was to display to you the futility of registration process, when the consequences of not being registered are nill
The non registered has no competent person scam to fund,"level playing field or what",
The problem is caused by Labc not ensuring part p is implemented

I personally have discussed the nonsense with one of your officers, who is charged with enforcing this nonsense
He made no secret of the fact that they have no time, expertise, or inclination, to want any involvement
When asked if he checked that the certificates obtained actually came from a registered person,his response was we dont check,we dont have the time for that

He is not a single loose cannon,far from it.
You are the one and only labc person, in my experience working in quite a few local authority areas, who has had the slightest interest in the nonsense,
I will take my hat off to you for your one man crusade,doomed to failure. but there lies reality



A sweeping statement if ever there was one, I work in building control and we do not accept PIRs as an alternative to an EIR in my LA

Then you are in a very small minority,the overwhelming majority see this as a very acceptable route


I would be obliged if you could forward the details of the insurance company involved it would be useful to have somewhere to refer victims of dodgey installers
Thats just a side swipe at the trade and will get no response



The concept of Part P is very good, simply to make it easy for competent persons to self certify whilst making others follow a different route. If Part P is not followed a criminal offence is committed and enforcement action will follow if the LA is made aware of the situation. Note that enforcement action only involves prosection as a last resort OR if the installation is dangerous.

Ask on this forum the amount of people who have reported the above and couldn't get any satisfactory response or action of their Labc,cloud cukoo land I believe on this one



It is the CP scheme organisers who certify such people - you are in a competetive market, adapt or fail!
You dont get the point that was made
Defined scope installers.ie plumbers tilers,kitchen fitters are assessed for work as a part of their trade,fitting a bolier spur or altering the location of a kitchen socket etc

This should never have been permitted,they either have the knowledge and experience of electrical installation or they dont
It is dangerous and folly to permit bit part installers, with very limited technical and testing knowlege (most of them fall in to the that bracket0

These defined scope installers can, with no comeback, expand their installations beyond what they are permitted, and you, and the schemes are unwilling, or unable to curtail this law breaking

Its not a case of adapt and survive ,this is a safety issue
This is just one instance of why part p has drastically lowered domestic installation standards,couple the bit part trades, with the unacceptable domestic installer acceptance level, and the consequence is inevitable



So a free-for-all would be better than no control; let everyone do what they want with no restriction! I only wish that CP scheme electricians were all as good as you suggest infortunately we regularly have to point out errors to "Part P electricians" very disappointing and extremely worrying
No not at all.competent person schemes are first of all dependant on membership fees to fund their scheme
They are then tasked with the assessment of those people that they desperately need and want for survival and influence,the two tasks are not compatable
There is almost universal acceptance that the schemes pass probably 99.9 % of applicants

The entry level to the domestic schemes were set so low ,there lies the probability of the reason for incompetent installers

I would suspect that the vast majority of electricians would like to see a government register where your qualifications and experience would permit the level appropriate and would be based on skill rather than numbers gathering as is now and get shot of these schemes



A consultation on changes to Part P will take place later this year - you will be able to respond as an individual or a company.[/QUOTE]

The schemes themselves are consulting with their members and will forward their opinions on members behalf,if you believe that you would be very surprised to know that members opinions dont quite seem to reflect what we are actually saying,rather what the schemes think the government want to hear

We as electricians have no say or influence on these decisions
All the interested parties" who speak on our behalf,because they certainly dont,are influenced by self preservation and monetary values rather than whats good for the industry

If installation work was permitted for any who wants to install,including diyers and the dreaded defined scope other trades,that should be the way forward

In the event of house sale or insurance purposes,an inspection by a qualified and experienced electrician on the correct level of the government register would need to be obtained
This will eventually do what the part nonesens has failed miserably this far, and eventually cause electricial installation standards to improve

 

[Geordie Spark]

This statement is used fairly regularly, but is wrong.
*To do work on your own gas fittings, you must be 'competent'. There is no definition of competent in the regulations. A friend once said to me that if you use a manometer to ensure there are no leaks, and you follow the various regs, then you could be classed as competent to do your own gas work.
*To work for a living doing gas work then by Law, you must be GasSafe registered, but, as with electricians, there are some real bad gas workers out there.

Posession of the ACS card & cerificate proves competence.

Being Gas Safe registered (and CORGI before that) shows that somebody has seen the card & certificate & relieved the holder of said card & certificate of several ££'s.

A cynical outlook I know, but nevertheless true.