Washing Machine in Bathroom

[oldtimer]

Maybe NZ repealed their Part P because it was uninforcable plus or the death rate did not change and plus the current economical climate was stopping growth.

Dont get me wrong Part P was a good idea when the trade was short of sparks and the logic of Schemies policing it sounded good so where did it go wrong well the Schemies drove the 5 week courses for domestics when they should have been 18-24 months plus instead of producing a steady stream of "Domestic" electricians our trade is now saturated with Electrical Trainee who cannot be blamed as they were sold the dream.

So instead of propping up the trade the Schemies have ended up diluting it and ironically in my view made a mockery of Part P and are now paying the price so instead of going back to the government and saying ok we will police individuals until they are competent to work independantly nope they have tried to hold on to existing because they see the money but don't reralise the Golden Goose syndrome.

Now for anyone who thinks O yea well look at it this way years ago people served their time then were competent to work on their own and when the regs got changed they went back to college to get updated to ensure their JIB or SJIB card would be u to date. Now this system worked and we never had the mess we have now so getting back to NZ maybe they sat down one day and figured this out and were brave enough to say You know what we were wrong so lets repeal this.

 

[Outspoken]

The main problem with the kind of stats we have is that they do not discriminate well. What is at stake is a proper empirical understanding of the way in which compliant installations exceed the safety of installations which are non-compliant, or compliant but installed by an amateur. Although we know theoretically that modern standards and practice are potentially much safer than previously a decline in electrically related fatalities doesn't mean that it is entirely the result of regulations or compliance with regard to fixed wiring installations. We need to collect much better, detailed data to prove that and I doubt that we will ever see such data. Improvements in fire safety education, use of equipment, quality of consumer products and whole range of other building control practices need to be controlled for.
Governments pass all kinds of legislation all the time based on poor or no real evidence in all spheres from health to education to social policy. Interesting that NZ have repealled their Part p. Didn't know that. I wonder what they based that on?

Can't find anything to disagree with there but I do not think that the IET playing with the Regs is making installations inherently safer, the tinkering we have seen over the last decade is simply examples, IMHO, of health and Safety compliance gone mad. The Regs claim that Domestic premises are more likely to have incompetent people in them than commercial premises and thus the higher standard, odd really, I wonder were the writers of the regs think the commercial people live? generally in life I find people leave their brain at home when they go to work and not the other way around. But the changing of the Regs to encompass commercial premises would be a game changer as the money men would get involved.

The only real way of improving things further is education of the public, restriction of DIY electrical work and better training of those entering the industry back to a level we saw in the 1970's and early 1980's when we had true apprenticeships and not these pathetic excuses of a course run by JTL and the Electrical Trainee providers.

Maybe NZ repealed their Part P because it was uninforcable plus or the death rate did not change and plus the current economical climate was stopping growth.

Dont get me wrong Part P was a good idea when the trade was short of sparks and the logic of Schemies policing it sounded good so where did it go wrong well the Schemies drove the 5 week courses for domestics when they should have been 18-24 months plus instead of producing a steady stream of "Domestic" electricians our trade is now saturated with Electrical Trainee who cannot be blamed as they were sold the dream.

So instead of propping up the trade the Schemies have ended up diluting it and ironically in my view made a mockery of Part P and are now paying the price so instead of going back to the government and saying ok we will police individuals until they are competent to work independantly nope they have tried to hold on to existing because they see the money but don't reralise the Golden Goose syndrome.

Now for anyone who thinks O yea well look at it this way years ago people served their time then were competent to work on their own and when the regs got changed they went back to college to get updated to ensure their JIB or SJIB card would be u to date. Now this system worked and we never had the mess we have now so getting back to NZ maybe they sat down one day and figured this out and were brave enough to say You know what we were wrong so lets repeal this.

Part P was introduced as a knee jerk reaction because a kitchen fitter killed an MP's daughter, they changed the methodology of implementation after it was given the Prescott's Office to deal with and after that it went down hill fast.

The electrical industry in this country is in crisis, but as yet it has not realised it had a stroke. Standards are slipping, those being trained now are unable to differentiate between their rear and their elbow, most have no idea how to do proper electrical calculations or understand how some of the kit works, they lack drive and determination for the most part and the NICEIC, IET, JIB and all other bodies with influence do nothing about it as they cannot earn any money out of making changes...

It'll likely take the death of someone ubber famous for any real debate to happen

 

[Engineer54]

You are clearly implying some form of massaging or manipulation of the data and you would be wrong on that, it is simply the raw data as I found it with some spurious breakdowns removed to avoid an overly complicated table and confusing the issue.

I'm not implying you have massaged or manipulated the data you have found!! What i'm saying is, that what you have done in combining these figures from different sources into a single table, does not and cannot work. Your combining figures based on different criteria and by your own admission unknown criteria.... In other words it's a totally meaningless table.

I agree that data can be manipulated and your comment about the US and Canada and their codes is such a straw man argument that it does not do you justice. I lived in Canada for 5 years more than 20 years ago and worked all over the States due to the work, and education and attitude is a major issue south of the border, like it or not.

Your not the only one that has spent time in the States/Canada, so don't go there. Are you really trying to convince us that your stated 57,700 instances as against 12 is anywhere representable between the States and Canada that use the same basic electrical codes??

We also need to take into account that in the UK if the Fire Brigade are unable to find the cause of a fire they list it as "Electrical", it is likely that other nations may do the same, and if this is the case then there could well be a lot of records that are simply incorrectly labelled by the relevant authorities.

Your taking overall data, even for the UK and wrongly applying them, as an argument against protected socket outlets in bathrooms. How many from each country actually met their death from electrocution in the bathroom?? I'm sorry but this is all proving nothing, the whole table becomes even more pointless.

With regards sockets in bathrooms, we will simply have to agree to disagree.

That goes without saying!! lol!!

Fires and electrocution is a strange combination to base a report/statistics on, unless there is a purpose for it's combination, as you state for the fire brigade to arbitrarily blame ''electrical''!!

 

[Outspoken]

Odd way to reply with quoting your own past, but hey ho.

I love the way you claim that the figures must be meaningless because I have put them together in a table...what a daft thing to say. To imply they are not truly reflective for various reasons that make sense is 100% spot on and will not get a disagreement from me, but your comments are laughable.

As for me taking UK data and wronlgy applying, please explain, have you some gift that allows you to rewrite mathematical norms?

With respect the Fire brigade, take that up with them, they are the one who do it. It is clear that if they cannot explain a fire they class it as electrical, that does not make it right or logical to me anymore than you, but that is a fact and that is a fact we have to deal with. As I said, I do not know if other nations do this, however i have fired off an email to a Fire Investigator I know in the States to get his thoughts on the electrical fire issue and if they have national guidelines in the states for this or each state does it differently.

 

[telectrix]

I think all unexplained fires shoud be blamed on plumbers.

 

[Outspoken]

I think all unexplained fires shoud be blamed on plumbers.

I reckon that all flooding should be down to Plumbers...and as such all plumbers should carry £10 Billion Public Liability Insurance...

 

[Engineer54]

I've given you more than enough reasons why your combined table, sourced from all over the place is totally meaningless, if you can't understand why those reasons negate any comparison being possible, that's your problem not mine!!

Exactly what are you trying prove by your table anyway?? It certainly has nothing to do with installing protected bathroom socket outlets, unless your trying to imply your sourced data can be used as a direct indication of such installations??

Well you ARE taking the data wrongly, what the hell has this UK data got to do with electrical bathroom deaths?? What mathematical formula norms are you talking about?? Has not the UK data been based on actual collated recorded data, or is it all based on some statistical formula??

Maybe those where the fire brigade arbitrary designate an unknown cause of fire, as electrical?? ..very scientific that, but nothing to do with mathematical norms!! It's called institutional form filling Bullsh1te!!

 

[spark 68]

.
Governments pass all kinds of legislation all the time based on poor or no real evidence in all spheres from health to education to social policy. Interesting that NZ have repealled their Part p. Didn't know that. I wonder what they based that on?

I believe they repealed their version of part P because people started using extension leads everywhere to circumvent the law, and this apparently caused accidents in the home to sky rocket due to fires and trip and falls etc.. and so had the opposite effect of what was desired lol :yes:

Common sense from a government !, shock horror lol.

 

[Outspoken]

I've given you more than enough reasons why your combined table, sourced from all over the place is totally meaningless, if you can't understand why those reasons negate any comparison being possible, that's your problem not mine!!

Exactly what are you trying prove by your table anyway?? It certainly has nothing to do with installing protected bathroom socket outlets, unless your trying to imply your sourced data can be used as a direct indication of such installations??

Well you ARE taking the data wrongly, what the hell has this UK data got to do with electrical bathroom deaths?? What mathematical formula norms are you talking about?? Has not the UK data been based on actual collated recorded data, or is it all based on some statistical formula??

Maybe those where the fire brigade arbitrary designate an unknown cause of fire, as electrical?? ..very scientific that, but nothing to do with mathematical norms!! It's called institutional form filling Bullsh1te!!

WTF are you talking about, that is total nonsense

 

[Engineer54]

WTF are you talking about, that is total nonsense

Oh, I beg to differ, .... it's you that has been talking utter nonsense!! lol!!

 

[Outspoken]

Oh, I beg to differ, .... it's you that has been talking utter nonsense!! lol!!

Chap, I suggest you stick to Chinese because clearly English presents difficulties for you.

Oh..why the hell do you add LOL to most of your sentences, are you some spotty faced teenager who thinks everything he says is funny....because it's not..LOL

 

[Engineer54]

Ah, the need to get personal now is it!! lol!!

I really shouldn't have ever replied to that Table of yours, ...save to say that it was totally meaningless, irrelevant to the thread and to try again!!


Oh, ...Why do i always use lol?? Because it seems to annoy ''YOU'' so much!! wait for it, .....lol!!

 

[Outspoken]

E54, I really don't care and I am only having a wind up, it's not personal and won't be. You think what you do and I think what i do, we are not agreeing because we are looking at this from different angles...it's not the end of the world and I certainly am not going to get into a spat over it...the devil in me was wondering how you would reply and how many LOL's you would add to your post.. LOL

 

[Stroppy]

The Lol!! thing annoys me, too, as you may have noticed! Do you do it in real life? "Hello my name's E54 HAHAHAHA! I've come to look at your electrics. HAHAHAHA!" (etc)

Edit: Lol!!

 

[telectrix]

well he's in china so perhaps it should be ROL. bit like the chinese guy in lethal weapon 4, who when mel gibson says flied lice, he relpies it's fried rice, you plick.