Revised Part P 6th April

[AdamCH]

If the new part P allows installers who are not registered competent persons to appoint a registered third-party certifier to inspect, test and sign off on the work. Am I right in thinking that this would allow a DIY'er to arrange to do the work if they arrange for a registered third-party certifier?

Link to new part P http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/buildingregulations/approveddocuments/partp/approved#Download

 

[EFLImpudence]

I think it has been accepted that to supervise throughout the work and issue an EIC is no different than that which is possible now.

The new arrangement merely allows third parties to issue an EICR after completion.

Who will be allowed to do that and at what cost is unclear so may not be worth the bother.
In my view because if it doesn't test satisfactorily will lead to argument and frequent revisits and be no cheaper than notifying the LABC..

 

[AdamCH]

The new Part P is a heck of a lot easier to read than the old one but to get is straight in my own mind.

If I wanted to replace my consumer unit would I just need to arrange for a third party certifier to ok / oversee / test and they would be responsible for notifying building control?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Well, that is a good example.

The only notifiable work will be new circuits (if they intend it to mean the definition in the regulations), work within the zones of bathrooms etc. and consumer units.

When installing a new consumer unit an EIC has to be issued which entails testing all the circuits to ensure safe operation and ensuring that the earthing conductor and main bonding conductors are satisfactory.

I am unsure what issuing an EICR on a replaced consumer unit would involve.
If it is as above then there is no point a DIYer doing it as it would need to be disconnected and reconnecting again.

 

[AdamCH]

So are registered third-party certifier schemes ready to go or have these schemes not got going yet?

 

[EFLImpudence]

I haven't heard anything from anyone.

 

[SaladFingers]

part pee, pfffft.

 

[JohnW2]

I think it has been accepted that to supervise throughout the work and issue an EIC is no different than that which is possible now. The new arrangement merely allows third parties to issue an EICR after completion.

I would imagine that I'm not alone in not yet being too clear about many details of all this, given the paucity of official information! It sounds as if you are probably interpreting things in the same way as me, in that the third party will not necessarily need to have any involvement until the work has been completed in order to satisfy the requirements as regards what will be left of notifiable work. If that is the case, could this mechanism perhaps be used to 'regularise' work which was undertaken between 1st January 2005 and 6th April 2013 without required notification (i.e. will there be any time limit between completion of the work and certification by the third party?).

I'm also unclear as to how 'notification' is to happen in these cases (in respect to what will be left of notifiable work) - I'm inclined to assume that this will probably be achieved by the third-party-certifier dealing with the LABC, in the same way as with self-certified work - is that what you believe/expect? ... and then, of course, there's the unanswered question as to what LABC will charge for this!

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

could this mechanism perhaps be used to 'regularise' work which was undertaken between 1st January 2005 and 6th April 2013 without required notification (i.e. will there be any time limit between completion of the work and certification by the third party?).

How would 'they' know when it was done if certified now?

I'm also unclear as to how 'notification' is to happen in these cases (in respect to what will be left of notifiable work) - I'm inclined to assume that this will probably be achieved by the third-party-certifier dealing with the LABC, in the same way as with self-certified work - is that what you believe/expect?

I would assume that the registering bodies will oversee the procedure and it is they who will be notified and issue 'Compliance Certificate'.
I am not really sure if the LABC is actually notified or what happens to the information - database???

and then, of course, there's the unanswered question as to what LABC will charge for this!

I am hoping I (as registered self-certifier) will automatically be allowed to do it but I would not be surprised if even more money is required plus anyone not doing EICRs at the moment will need PI insurance.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If the new part P allows installers who are not registered competent persons to appoint a registered third-party certifier to inspect, test and sign off on the work.

NO IT DOES NOT.

Part P has absolutely nothing to do with registered competent persons, absolutely nothing to do with 3rd-party certifiers, and is not changing on April 6th.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

part pee, pfffft.

Spoken like a true scumbag criminal.

Not that I'm surprised, given your previous dismissals of anything remotely approaching professionalism and duty of care.

 

[JohnW2]

How would 'they' know when it was done if certified now?

Exactly my point. It looks as if EICRs (undertaken by a person whoi has paid the appropriate sums!) may become a way of regularising anything which has ever happened, now or in the past.

I would assume that the registering bodies will oversee the procedure and it is they who will be notified and issue 'Compliance Certificate'. I am not really sure if the LABC is actually notified or what happens to the information - database???

With self-certification, I had always assumed that 'notification'eventually got back to LABC - since they are really the guardians of notifiable work (and the people who would/could pursue people for non-notification) - is that true? If so, I would assume that the same would/will probably apply to third-party-certification.

Kind Regards, John

 

[SaladFingers]

part pee, pfffft.

Spoken like a true scumbag criminal.

Not that I'm surprised, given your previous dismissals of anything remotely approaching professionalism and duty of care.

Awwwww is ickle bassy wassy getting all upsetty wetty woo woo over some words?

Awwwwww bless.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I would imagine that I'm not alone in not yet being too clear about many details of all this, given the paucity of official information! It sounds as if you are probably interpreting things in the same way as me, in that the third party will not necessarily need to have any involvement until the work has been completed in order to satisfy the requirements as regards what will be left of notifiable work.

If you can find a 3rd-party certifier who is prepared to put his professional reputation (and liability) on the line by certifying that work which he has had absolutely no chance to inspect before it's presented to him as a fait accompli complies with Part P (which in practice will mean certifying that it complies with BS 7671).

(That's a big "If", BTW)

If that is the case, could this mechanism perhaps be used to 'regularise' work which was undertaken between 1st January 2005 and 6th April 2013 without required notification

No, because work started between those dates required notifying.

(i.e. will there be any time limit between completion of the work and certification by the third party?).

In practice you'll be able to get away with a bit of fudging, but strictly speaking the new regime does not start until April 6th and therefore no work started before then can be done under the new regime.

I'm also unclear as to how 'notification' is to happen in these cases (in respect to what will be left of notifiable work) - I'm inclined to assume that this will probably be achieved by the third-party-certifier dealing with the LABC, in the same way as with self-certified work - is that what you believe/expect?

I imagine it will be just like the has-been-existing-for-years regime of using a 3rd party Building Inspector.

... and then, of course, there's the unanswered question as to what LABC will charge for this!

Anything they charge will be built into the costs of the 3rd party.
[/quote]

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Awwwww is ickle bassy wassy getting all upsetty wetty woo woo over some words?

Awwwwww bless.

No - just making sure people don't forget what a disgusting and dangerous cowboy you are who does not believe that electrical work should be safe.

You yourself have done the reminding of what a pathetically immature child you are.