NeoX - I've never been too fussed about certs & the like myself but are you sure everything's been done okay? They weren't very good at tiling and cut some corners to the point it was dangerous.
NeoX - I've never been too fussed about certs & the like myself but are you sure everything's been done okay? They weren't very good at tiling and cut some corners to the point it was dangerous.
Sponsored Links
Only done because the OP seemed unable to see what I'd written when it was in the default font.
Quotes make it easier to see what replies apply to.
If people are going to lose interest in a discussion because of the use of non-default text formatting and quoting then they must have a pretty trivial attitude.
N
NeoX
I was very clear in my post of 10:28 that I didn't want this to become a drawn-out Internet debate, and ban-all-sheds immediately launched into one, and the last post from said user is nothing more than an angry emotional spout of drivel concerning semantics and completely misses the mark on what I was trying to say. ban-all-sheds, we're not singing from the same song sheet here, so no point us arguing. You win the Internet today, well done.
If anyone else has anything useful to add, please do so.
I think JohnW2 summed it up nicely how this thread is going and brought it back to its main purpose.
Just to clarify, I think what I meant by '2005' was that EICs were not a legal requirement under Part P of the Building Regulations until 2005. Before that, I could have had electrical work done and not need to have it certified in order to be legal or sell the property. I found this from a very quick search on the Internet (as I'm new to this), but I may have got the year wrong. My point is, it hasn't been like this forever, and it was a question of morality that ban-all-sheds mentioned, and his assertion implies that all electrical work before EICs became mandatory is immoral. And that's an absurd statement to make.
I think the upshot of all of this is that I will get the builder to sign the first two parts of the EIC (regardless of any hypothetical discussion we've had here), and another electrician who is qualified to issue an EICR to also sign of the third part of the EIC (as well as issue an EICR for the whole property at the same time).
In terms of being "qualified", I will find an electrician that I think an LABC would be happy with, that being someone who is registered with NICEIC, NAPIT or is a Registered Competent Person. On that last point, really, what should I be looking for out of those three types of registration?
If anyone else has anything useful to add, please do so.
I think JohnW2 summed it up nicely how this thread is going and brought it back to its main purpose.
Just to clarify, I think what I meant by '2005' was that EICs were not a legal requirement under Part P of the Building Regulations until 2005. Before that, I could have had electrical work done and not need to have it certified in order to be legal or sell the property. I found this from a very quick search on the Internet (as I'm new to this), but I may have got the year wrong. My point is, it hasn't been like this forever, and it was a question of morality that ban-all-sheds mentioned, and his assertion implies that all electrical work before EICs became mandatory is immoral. And that's an absurd statement to make.
I think the upshot of all of this is that I will get the builder to sign the first two parts of the EIC (regardless of any hypothetical discussion we've had here), and another electrician who is qualified to issue an EICR to also sign of the third part of the EIC (as well as issue an EICR for the whole property at the same time).
In terms of being "qualified", I will find an electrician that I think an LABC would be happy with, that being someone who is registered with NICEIC, NAPIT or is a Registered Competent Person. On that last point, really, what should I be looking for out of those three types of registration?
If you don't want a drawn-out Internet debate then please stop writing things that are wrong which require correction for the benefit of those readers who wish to do it correctly and take note of what has been written.
You are confusing EICertificates from the installer which he MUST issue and Completion Certificates from the LABC or Compliance Certificates from the Competent Person Schemes.
I agree that the situation is confusing but not that difficult to grasp if you take note of the posts which you don't like as well as any which may agree with what you do want to hear.
You are confusing EICertificates from the installer which he MUST issue and Completion Certificates from the LABC or Compliance Certificates from the Competent Person Schemes.
I agree that the situation is confusing but not that difficult to grasp if you take note of the posts which you don't like as well as any which may agree with what you do want to hear.
Sponsored Links
What you want, and what you get when you say things which are wrong and display attitudes which merit criticism are two different things.
Drivel?
Really?
Is that your usual response when you say something wrong and get pulled up for it?
If you have the mental capacity I suggest you go and look up what the word "drivel" means and then see if you can provide a rational and intelligent explanation of why it applies to what I wrote.
You wilfully or negligently ignored what I said and then proceeded to criticise me on the basis of your flawed reading.
They are not and never have been a legal requirement under Part P.
This is what Part P says:
Try as you might to dismiss it as drivel concerning semantics, you did not say, or by any stretch of the imagination imply, what you now say you meant. You said, quite clearly, that EICs did not exist before 2005. And that's equally clearly incorrect.
That is true, but if you had wanted the work to comply with the Wiring Regulations then you would have had to have had an EIC. And it has always been the case that if Fred didn't do the design then Fred should not sign an EIC to say that he did, no matter how well qualified he is.
What's absurd is you claiming that I implied that. It's another example of you wilfully or negligently not reading properly.
What I said was morally suspect was your position regarding an EIC fraudulently signed by someone who had not done the work which he was certifying.
Why not make sure by asking them what they'd be happy with?
NICEIC and NAPIT are two of the organisations who run Competent Person schemes, and are the best known and longest established. In terms of whether being registered with them, or any of the others, is any guarantee per se of competence-with-a-small-c they are all equally useless. Your LABC should not care which one an electrician has chosen to join, but some of them do mandate a particular one. That's always seemed to me to be an unlawful restraint of trade, but that's a battle for the schemes not accepted by any particular LABC to fight.
In an attempt to explain, maybe a little more calmly than others have done ... Part P of the Building Regs did not exist until 2005, so obviously could not have imposed any legal requirements before then. As has been pointed out to you, Part P actually says so little that, even since 2005, it has not explicitly required EICs (or anything else explicit/specific, come to that!). However, the official guidance to Part P indicates that 'one way' of demonstrating compliance with Part P is to comply with the IET Wiring Regulations (aka BS7671) - and for 99%+ of people (including electricians) it is effectively the only way that they can demonstrate compliance with Part P. Since those regulations require an IEC, this means that, in practice, one can't now demonstrate compliance with Part P without there being an EIC.
It is certainly true that, prior to 2005, there was no law relating to electrical work in the sense that 'Part P' does, and equally true that past electrical work was not usually an issue when selling a house. Mind you, as regards the latter, I don't think it's much of an issue even now, provided you tell the truth. When selling the house, you will be asked whether any electrical work has been undertaken since 1st Jan 2005 and, if so 'please provide the relevant certificates'. If you answer by saying that, yes, work has been done, but that there are no certificates, the very worst that may happen is that a potential buyer would 'back out' (unlikely) or attempt to use it as a bargaining point to negotiate a small reduction in price.
As others have said, the important thing is that you should satisfy yourself that any work which has been done is satisfactory and safe, and commissioning an EICR would probably be the best way of achieving that - 'bits of paper' (other than the EICR!) are, IMO, of secondary importance.
Kind Regards, John
Hmm EICs
Well up until the ESI was privatised all electrical installations were connected to the meter by the Electricity Boards, in the one I work in this was done by Installation Inspectors.
Now for an installation to be connected a Wiring Completion Certificate was an absolute requirement, no Completion Certificate, no connection.
Of course they only needed signed by the person that did the wiring to accept responsibility for that wiring, but they certainly were the forerunner of the EIC and had possibly more weight.
(BTW in those days paper records were kept for all properties, these certificates were filed and kept for a number of years)
I suppose this old system also ensured an independent check of all installation by the inspector, few failed but if they did they were not connected
Well up until the ESI was privatised all electrical installations were connected to the meter by the Electricity Boards, in the one I work in this was done by Installation Inspectors.
Now for an installation to be connected a Wiring Completion Certificate was an absolute requirement, no Completion Certificate, no connection.
Of course they only needed signed by the person that did the wiring to accept responsibility for that wiring, but they certainly were the forerunner of the EIC and had possibly more weight.
(BTW in those days paper records were kept for all properties, these certificates were filed and kept for a number of years)
I suppose this old system also ensured an independent check of all installation by the inspector, few failed but if they did they were not connected
N
NeoX
Thanks JohnW2 once again for a great summary well explained.
To be honest, I'm little concerned with the history - I merely mentioned EICs and 2005 in response to a comment made by ban-all-sheds and it's blown up into a full-on history lesson across about an entire page of this topic.
Back to the present...
I'm beginning to learn that there is no real hard and fast official method to complying with Building Regulations. It's more a case of just satisfying the LABC that competent persons have done the work and tested it. And electricians registered with established schemes can help convince them of that.
So, to try and summarise once more...
As for ban-all-sheds, your continual venting is serving no purpose. I'm ignoring your posts as you do nothing but belittle those who are trying to gain knowledge and ask questions and then lambaste them for getting one or two things wrong when clearly just trying to decipher the array of information out there. Other users have corrected me and I thank them for it. Your posts are mainly just offensive drivel. I haven't once insulted your intellect yet you have done. Know who you're insulting properly before make such bold statements. And on here, that is quite impossible.
To be honest, I'm little concerned with the history - I merely mentioned EICs and 2005 in response to a comment made by ban-all-sheds and it's blown up into a full-on history lesson across about an entire page of this topic.
Back to the present...
I'm beginning to learn that there is no real hard and fast official method to complying with Building Regulations. It's more a case of just satisfying the LABC that competent persons have done the work and tested it. And electricians registered with established schemes can help convince them of that.
So, to try and summarise once more...
- EIC first and second parts - my builder
- EIC third part - qualified electrician (NICEIC or NAPIT)
- EICR - qualified electrician (NICEIC or NAPIT)
- Completion Certificate - LABC inspector
As for ban-all-sheds, your continual venting is serving no purpose. I'm ignoring your posts as you do nothing but belittle those who are trying to gain knowledge and ask questions and then lambaste them for getting one or two things wrong when clearly just trying to decipher the array of information out there. Other users have corrected me and I thank them for it. Your posts are mainly just offensive drivel. I haven't once insulted your intellect yet you have done. Know who you're insulting properly before make such bold statements. And on here, that is quite impossible.
The one twist you forget to mention is that what it takes "to satisfy LABC" will depend crucially on the particular BC inspector/officer you are dealing with! That being the case, and given that it is ultimately the last item on your list which really matters (at least, in law), the only really safe way to get an answer to the question is to ask the BCO whether, given the first three things on your list, (s)he will issue the fourth!
Kind Regards, John
N
NeoX
You're offensive and downright rude, and clearly have insecurity issues having to argue on the Internet with strangers. I have very little time for keyboard jockeys such as you that go to great lengths to make points that have no relevance to the subject matter and to satisfy your own little-man ego. I'm clicking the Ignore button straight after this post, so hopefully it will mean I no longer see your posts.
Edit: Cool feature, this is what I see now in place:
Edit: Cool feature, this is what I see now in place:
Yes it will mean that.
Everyone else though can see that until you got so ridiculously bent out of shape just because I said that your claim that EICs didn't exist was nonsense you had thanked me for some of my posts.
Everyone else though can see that any arguments were, basically, started by you. You argued with me when I told you, quite correctly, that EICs existed well before 2005. You argued with me when I told you, quite correctly, that completing an EIC was part of doing the work. You argued with me when I told you, quite correctly, that EICs could not legitimately be signed by someone who hadn't done the work he was claiming to have done. You twisted and misinterpreted what I wrote and then criticised me because you didn't like what you'd fashioned. You drew an inference so ludicrous that it could reasonably be described as barking mad and then criticised me for that.
Not very polite ...... but sadly trueModerator 8 said:
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 23,687
- Reaction score
- 2,669
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
Yes about right. A qualified electrician does not have to be a member of any scheme but being a member does help in getting the LABC to accept them as having the required knowledge.
Oddly the regulations don't call people electricians they have four categories of person.
Competent
Skilled
Instructed
Ordinary
Your builder should be considered as either competent or skilled as of course the electrician is also going to fall into one of the first two categories. We would hope in both cases Competent which means they can ensure the safety of others as well as themselves.
Personally when the scheme's started and they named them "Competent persons scheme" I felt that was a bad name as it was asking for confusion as one hopes all electricians as competent persons.
If the property was not rented I would say forget about paperwork it's only required when you sell and an electrical installation condition report done at the time would be better. However you say it is rented out so you need that paperwork to ensure your not placed in the position of Hilary Thompson the 82 year old land lord who was fined £5000 over the death of Thirza Whittall.
I felt sorry for the old lady as she had engaged an electrician to check over the house but Thirza Whittall was killed before he got around to doing the job.
To me this is the beauty of the registered work with LABC from the moment you hand over the money they are responsible not you for site safety.
It is untrue.
My attitude is that I will not tolerate being criticised on the basis of flawed reading.
I told the OP that if he colluded with the falsification of an EIC he would be not be morally above board, and he started claiming that that meant I was implying that all electrical work done before 2005 was immoral.
When I said that I didn't know enough about the history of the wiring regs to say when EICs appeared, but that I could assure him it was long before 2005, his reaction was that I'd admitted I didn't know enough to comment, and therefore my use of the word "nonsense" was obtuse.
Unacceptable, and cannot be left unchallenged.
It is true.
Its the internet just let it go. No one else gets so het up over nothing.
Its the internet just let it go. No one else gets so het up over nothing.
DIYnot Local
Staff member
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
Sponsored Links
