Notifiable work ??

PBC_1966 · 10 Feb 2016

Summary:

Replacing the cable to the shed is not notifiable.

Replacing the consumer unit with another or with something else may or may not be, depending upon how one interprets the ambiguous rules, and depending upon whether you create any new circuits in the shed in the process. Trying to decide whether you have done the latter could also be difficult.

Presumably as you work in industrial/commercial settings you'll be doing everything to a perfectly safe standard, testing, and probably supplying a certificate.

Ultimately notification falls on the homeowner, so you needn't worry about that.

To the best of our knowledge, not one single case has ever been brought against somebody just for failing to notify a job; it's always involved sub-standard, dangerous work.

Depending upon the local authority involved, notification could cost anything from about £100 up to £400 or more, not to mention getting involved with the usual council red-tape.

Suggestion:

Explain the situation to the homeowner and let him decide whether he wants to bother with notification or not.

Go ahead and do a safe job and get paid.

Result:

Home owner is happy, you're happy!

securespark · 10 Feb 2016

What gets me about Approved Document P is that yes, you can replace a cable but it must be on condition that you replace with one that has the same CCC and follows the same route...

But what if that CCC or route are substandard?

For that matter it does not mention the cable type.

JohnW2 · 10 Feb 2016

securespark said:
What gets me about Approved Document P is that yes, you can replace a cable but it must be on condition that you replace with one that has the same CCC and follows the same route...

You probably should ask Mr Approved Doc P (or maybe the Deputy Prime Minister) where in the legislation he found that one!!

Kind Regards, John

EFLImpudence · 10 Feb 2016

securespark said:
What gets me about Approved Document P

What gets me about Approved Document P is why anyone bothered.

Taylortwocities · 10 Feb 2016

EFLImpudence said:
securespark said:

What gets me about Approved Document P

Click to expand...

What gets me about Approved Document P is why anyone bothered.

It was something for two Jags to do on a Thursday. That and doing away with filament light bulbs.

ban-all-sheds · 10 Feb 2016

PBC_1966 said:
Personally, I would say that taking the wording literally, "replacement of a consumer unit" means that a consumer unit (however defined) is removed and replaced with something else, which may or may not be a consumer unit.

We had someone here once who argued that

a) If you moved the main switch to an external enclosure it was no longer a CU, and so could not be notifiable
b) As the regulations refer to a consumer unit they could not apply if you installed more than one.

The earlier version of the regulations referred specifically to the "provision of a new consumer unit" being notifiable.

I'm surprised that in those days nobody ever suggested buying a used CU on fleabay to get around that.

[/quote]The whole wording of what's notifiable was a mess in the draft proposal (which would have made the installation of a battery powered doorbell notifiable work!), it was an ambiguous mess in the original legislated version, and this new version, while greatly simplified and removing many questions of notifiable vs. non-notifiable which existed before, is still badly written.[/QUOTE]
Indeed.

"new circuit" needs a definition - shouldn't be too difficult.

And the CU malarkey could be sorted by saying "installation, re-installation, replacement or moving a consumer unit".

ban-all-sheds · 10 Feb 2016

Taylortwocities said:
It was something for two Jags to do on a Thursday. That and doing away with filament light bulbs.

Neither of those were really anything to do with him.

ban-all-sheds · 10 Feb 2016

PBC_1966 said:
Ultimately notification falls on the homeowner, so you needn't worry about that.

Wrong.

Unless the homeowner does the work, of course, but in this case he is not. The regulations are quite clear in saying that it is the person who does the work who has to notify, not his customer.

Suggestion:

Explain the situation to the homeowner and let him decide whether he wants to bother with notification or not.

It is not up to the homeowner to decide if the electrician he employs should obey the law, or not.

Go ahead and do a safe job and get paid.

Result:

Home owner is happy, you're happy!

Please do not suggest that an electrician should incorporate deliberate lawbreaking into his business practices - it is completely unacceptable.

PBC_1966 · 10 Feb 2016

ban-all-sheds said:
We had someone here once who argued that

a) If you moved the main switch to an external enclosure it was no longer a CU, and so could not be notifiable

Again, it depends upon what definition of "consumer unit" one is using. At the time the term was introduced it did refer to an all-in-one unit with main switch with multiple fuses. So by that definition, if you install something which does not incorporate a main switch, it is indeed not a consumer unit.

But as the regulations don't really specify what they mean by the term, it's more ambiguity.

b) As the regulations refer to a consumer unit they could not apply if you installed more than one.

Well, that's certainly stretching it! I wouldn't go along with that one.

The earlier version of the regulations referred specifically to the "provision of a new consumer unit" being notifiable.

Click to expand...

I'm surprised that in those days nobody ever suggested buying a used CU on fleabay to get around that.

Thinking about it again, I don't think it actually used the word "new," just saying "provision of a consumer unit."

And the CU malarkey could be sorted by saying "installation, re-installation, replacement or moving a consumer unit".

But there would still be a need to define what is meant by "consumer unit."

ban-all-sheds · 10 Feb 2016

PBC_1966 said:
Well, that's certainly stretching it! I wouldn't go along with that one.

But you would go along with the argument that whatever the reason(s) they had for making CUs notifiable, it would be reasonable to assume that they would not think that a distribution board should likewise be notifiable?

But there would still be a need to define what is meant by "consumer unit."

I'll ante up

"any enclosure containing any circuit protective device or devices apart from a BS 1363 fused connection unit".

PBC_1966 · 10 Feb 2016

ban-all-sheds said:
PBC_1966 said:

Ultimately notification falls on the homeowner, so you needn't worry about that.

Click to expand...

Wrong.

Unless the homeowner does the work, of course, but in this case he is not. The regulations are quite clear in saying that it is the person who does the work who has to notify, not his customer.

No, what the regulations actually say is that "a person who intends to carry out building work" must notify, if applicable. That doesn't mean the person who is physically doing the work, unless he also happens to be the same person, which in this case he is not.

Please do not suggest that an electrician should incorporate deliberate lawbreaking into his business practices - it is completely unacceptable.

He wouldn't be. The homeowner might be, but I wish you would get some perspective into your ridiculous attitude to notification. When the rules are ambiguous to begin with, the fees excessive, and it's just a petty regulation which didn't even exist until quite recently, nobody really cares. And that, apparently, seems to include some individuals within local authorities, if not the official position of that authority as a whole.

stillp · 10 Feb 2016

PBC_1966 said:
nobody really cares

Well, nobody in California anyway.

PBC_1966 · 10 Feb 2016

ban-all-sheds said:
But you would go along with the argument that whatever the reason(s) they had for making CUs notifiable, it would be reasonable to assume that they would not think that a distribution board should likewise be notifiable?

Certainly, there's is absolutely no logical reason why a consumer unit (taking it as being an all-in-one main switch and multiple fuses/MCB's) should be notifiable but some other kind of distribution board with or without a separate main switch should not. But logically, if that's what they intended, why did they limit the notification to "a consumer unit" and not include other types of equipment?

"any enclosure containing any circuit protective device or devices apart from a BS 1363 fused connection unit".

Wouldn't that make the replacement of a BS1363 plug on a piece of fixed equipment notifiable?

PBC_1966 · 10 Feb 2016

stillp said:
Well, nobody in California anyway.

I think B-A-S would probably have a fit if he looked through the real-estate listings here and saw the number of homes which are listed with unpermitted additions, sometimes up to 800 sq. ft.

ban-all-sheds · 10 Feb 2016

PBC_1966 said:
No, what the regulations actually say is that "a person who intends to carry out building work" must notify, if applicable. That doesn't mean the person who is physically doing the work, unless he also happens to be the same person, which in this case he is not.

If you look at all the instances of "person carrying out the work", or equivalent, in the Building Regulations, and try replacing them with householder/building owner/person ordering the work/etc, it becomes blindingly obvious that what it means is what it says, not what you would like it to mean.

He wouldn't be.

Yes he would - see above.

The homeowner might be, but I wish you would get some perspective into your ridiculous attitude to notification. When the rules are ambiguous to begin with, the fees excessive, and it's just a petty regulation which didn't even exist until quite recently, nobody really cares. And that, apparently, seems to include some individuals within local authorities, if not the official position of that authority as a whole.

Be that as it may, it IS what the law says, whether you like it or not.

Be that as it may, contravention IS a criminal offence punishable by a fine of up to £5,000. And neither the (un)likelihood of a prosecution nor how much you wish it were otherwise changes that.

You may not advise people to break the law, and you may not advise someone to conspire with another to break the law.

diynot

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.

Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

Notifiable work ??

Similar threads