DIY rewiring and Building control

[pompeygit]

Softus is right. By consensus we shoulld produce a document that will provide sound advice to DIYers on how to comply with Part P in the easiest possible way. The discussion has highlighted a number of holes in council procedure. As we can see some councils are very clear on their procedural requirements, whereas others appear to be confused.

We neeed to work to the lowest common denominator (say Mattylads Council) and provide advice via a number of steps or a flow chart how to fully comply with Part P.

I think we should always advise working to BS7671 to cover the DIYer from any issues that arise after they have sold their house. I will start the ball rolling in the simplest of terms, please ammmend and edit this until we arrive at asound bit of advice that can be entered into the wiki:

1. Check here to see if work is notifiable
2. If notification is not required carry on with project in safe manner, but ask advice if you are not sure.
3. If work is notifiable make contact with your local Building Control Office, a personal visit is always best and they will see you without appointment
4. Go armed with a list of Questions. i.e. Help me fill in the form, how much must I pay, when can I start, how many site visits will you make, what stages would you like to see, who is going to fill in the Electrical Installation Certificate
5. If they say we(the council) cannot test and inspect and fill in forms as we do not have resident sparkie.......ask them if they have a nominated sub-contractor who will provide this service on the basis that this is a requirement of their obligations (they should provide this service)
6. Or contact your own spark and ask if he will act as your Qualified Supervisor and inspect and test at relevant times during the installation. Agree with the QS how the job will be installed and on what dates he will be required to visit to check the job is installed correctly.
7. Or If you have sufficient competence fill in the forms yourself
8. Submit the completed forms to your Council and expect to receive your compliance certificate in 7-14 days[/url]

 

[mattylad]

Sounds good Pompeygit, although as much as we might like to comply with BS7671, £65 is a damn lot of money & too much for us diy'rs who are trying to do our jobs to a budget to afford, especially since we may only use it occasionally.

If the government wants us to work to it, if they even want to define that we work to it in law - then IMO it MUST be made available freely & not something that we must pay to get. Otherwise what's going to happen? we are simply going to not get it & then not follow it.

As for being able to read it, I do have the 16th edition and yes it is a tad confusing for the DIY'r especially since it covers such a wide area.
Other guides would be more helpful, I have PDF's of the 16th ed guides but am now unsure if I should even read them because they will no longer be current. Or will they? I started work on my house last year, I decided what I am going to do to it last year, I could say I designed the plan of what to do last year so cant I still finish the job to last years regs?

(although as said, I would rather do it all to current because thats likely to be better).

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Sounds good Pompeygit, although as much as we might like to comply with BS7671, £65 is a damn lot of money & too much for us diy'rs who are trying to do our jobs to a budget to afford, especially since we may only use it occasionally.

If things are that tight, what will you/do you do about test equipment?

If the government wants us to work to it, if they even want to define that we work to it in law - then IMO it MUST be made available freely & not something that we must pay to get. Otherwise what's going to happen? we are simply going to not get it & then not follow it.

Maybe that's why they don't mandate it? I wonder if there are any laws which say "you must to xyz" and then it costs you money to find out what xyz are?

As an aside though - if you thing £65 is a lot you should look at the prices of other BS documents...

As for being able to read it, I do have the 16th edition and yes it is a tad confusing for the DIY'r especially since it covers such a wide area.
Other guides would be more helpful, I have PDF's of the 16th ed guides but am now unsure if I should even read them because they will no longer be current. Or will they? I started work on my house last year, I decided what I am going to do to it last year, I could say I designed the plan of what to do last year so cant I still finish the job to last years regs?

I believe that jobs in flight can be finished to the standard they were designed and started.

But that said, of course, there's no legal reason why you can't continue to work to the 16th if you want.

(although as said, I would rather do it all to current because thats likely to be better).

Do that then...

[EDIT]Typo corrected[/EDIT]

 

[Spark123]

My reply was purely to do with spark123's belief that there is something special about those regulations, and the Act under which they are made, which reverses the usual presumption of innocence in English law.

My belief is not the as such the presumption of innocence, more the onus is put on the on the person/company accused of the offence to prove that they took all the reasonable steps to comply with said regulations.
It will be someone like the HSE making the accusition. They will be the ones stating which offence they believe you have contravened, if it is an absolute one it is up to you to prove otherwise.

 

[Softus]

It is the only time in an English court you are effectively guilty and the onus is on you to prove innocence..

So I've often heard.

It's complete b****cks - there is no special exemption for the EAWR from the general principle that until proven beyond reasonable doubt as guilty you are presumed to be innocent.

It isn't "complete boll*cks" at all.

The legislation in question is the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, which says:

40 Onus of proving limits of what is practicable etc

In any proceedings for an offence under any of the relevant statutory provisions
consisting of a failure to comply with a duty or requirement to do something
so far as is practicable or so far as is reasonably practicable, or to
use the best means to do something, it shall be for the accused to prove (as
the case may be) that it was not practicable or not reasonably practicable to
do more than was in fact done to satisfy the duty or requirement, or that
there was no better practicable means than was in fact used to satisfy the
duty or requirement.

Presumption of innocence still holds, but the burden of proof is shifted onto the accused.

 

[pompeygit]

Same thing in Memorandum of Guidance for EAWR. Regulation 29 shifts the burden of proof to the defence

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Same thing in Memorandum of Guidance for EAWR. Regulation 29 shifts the burden of proof to the defence

No - it tells you what a sufficient defence is, it does not reverse the burden of proof.

 

[mattylad]

If things are that tight, what dill you/do you do about test equipment?

Its not that things are that tight,its that with the ever increasing bills these days I cannot warrant spending that much on a book that will feature very little in what I do.

I have a Isotech DM98 multi meter for most tests. for the more difficult ones I shall beg& borrow them (I work for a major fire alarm manufacturer with hundreds of engineers up & donw th country, we must have some somewhere I can use )

I shall certainly NOT be purchasing any specific expensive test equipment. If a test cannot be done with basic equipment then it wont get done.

Can you suggest anything specific that a DIY'r should have in order to be able to test at home?

As an aside though - if you thing £65 is a lot you should look at the prices of other BS documents...

As I have posted elsewhere, they are mainly all downloadable for free, I already have oodles of them for work.

I believe that jobs in flight can be finished to the standard they were designed and started.

But that said, of course, there's no legal reason why you can't continue to work to the 16th if you want.

Thats what I thought, although I will try & do it to the newest std I can.

Do that then...

Will do, cheers. (As long as I can find out what "it" is & how it relates to what I'm doing).

 

[Spark123]

Same thing in Memorandum of Guidance for EAWR. Regulation 29 shifts the burden of proof to the defence

No - it tells you what a sufficient defence is, it does not reverse the burden of proof.

Defence
29. In any proceedings for an offence consisting of a contravention of regulations 4(4), 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 or 25, it shall be a defence for any person to prove that he took all reasonable steps and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of that offence.

Is saying to me it is up to the accused to prove they exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of that offence.

 

[Softus]

Defence
29. In any proceedings for an offence consisting of a contravention of regulations 4(4), 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 or 25, it shall be a defence for any person to prove that he took all reasonable steps and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of that offence.

Is saying to me it is up to the accused to prove they exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of that offence.

There's a clear difference between the EAWR and the HASAW Act.

The EAWR defines one possible defence, but doesn't require that to be the defence or exclude other possible defences.

The HASAW Act specifically states that the onus is on the accused to prove "that it was not practicable or not reasonably practicable to do more than was in fact done to satisfy the duty or requirement...".

 

[Spark123]

But the key point being, in the EAWR the defence offered basically requires the accused to prove their innocense.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I have a Isotech DM98 multi meter for most tests.

That will not do continuity, insulation resistance, loop resistance or RCD tests.

Can you suggest anything specific that a DIY'r should have in order to be able to test at home?

That depends on whether they want to test in accordance with BS 7671...

As I have posted elsewhere, they are mainly all downloadable for free, I already have oodles of them for work.

Missed that post...

 

[Softus]

But the key point being, in the EAWR the defence offered basically requires the accused to prove their innocense.

But it doesn't say that.

 

[Spark123]

OK, exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of that offence.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Is saying to me it is up to the accused to prove they exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of that offence.

What I see, when I look at it, is this:

29. In any proceedings for an offence consisting of a contravention of regulations 4(4), 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 or 25, it shall be a defence for any person to prove that he took all reasonable steps and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of that offence.

What I do not see is this:

29. In any proceedings for an offence consisting of a contravention of regulations 4(4), 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 or 25, it shall be a defence for any person to prove that he took all reasonable steps and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of that offence, and if he cannot show that then the prosecution do not have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he committed the offence consisting of a contravention of regulations 4(4), 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 or 25.