Part P from a consumers viewpoint

[rubble2]

I am not a qualified electrician but I am looking at having some electrical work carried out at home in the next couple of months. Having spent some time looking at the information available on this forum and elswhere I thought I had a reasonable understanding of Part P and the need for notification of certain electrical work.

In our local paper this week there is a half page ad from an electrical contactors which states the following :-

' Home owners are you aware that all electricians are required by law to have part p approval before they can undertake any domestic installation work in your home?

Landlords and business owners, are you aware that premises & rental properties are required by law to have an electrical inspection and test report at regular intervals to ensure the safety of the wiring'

I intend to use a suitably qualified electrician to carry out the work in my house as it will include a new CU and extra sockets in the kitchen, but if the claims in the advert are not true doesn't that just devalue the aims of part p legislation and make consumers like me who have some knowledge of the requirements come to the conclusion that I run a risk of being conned, let alone people with absolutely no understanding of the legislation?

 

[Collectors]

I would personally would try to find a qualified electrician that has been recommended by a friend that has had them working in their own house.
Just because someone is qualified, doesn’t mean they are good at their work or house trained. I have employed electricians in the past that are fantastic with light/heavy industrial work, but would i send them to a friend’s house? Not a chance.
There is also the fact that a fully qualified electrician can install their work as per regulations & issue a certificate of compliance, but the work can still look bad.
On the add in the paper part, most electricians i know, have never had to advertise & have more trouble keeping up with work than having to explain to the public the new rules & reg’s. But in all fairness, it might be someone just starting out.

 

[chapeau]

Home owners are you aware that all electricians are required by law to have part p approval before they can undertake any domestic installation work in your home?

Well, it's obviously false, and you could suspect he is trying to fool you. On the other hand electricians are not lawyers and are not trained to understand the law, and also they are often only spouting the guidance of some of the self certifying bodies, who really should know better. Though definitely I would not call this person first as it's not a good start, it would be hard to trust his advice on matters he should know about.

 

[bernardgreen]

Some newspapers will on, being informed of mistakes such as this in adverts, remove the advert or require that the mistakes are corrected.

Worth asking the newspaper's advertisment editor.

 

[mikhailfaradayski]

' Home owners are you aware that all electricians are required by law to have part p approval before they can undertake any domestic installation work in your home?

Quite poorly worded and doesn't give a good impression to potential customers. However, reading it a bit differently, it could be true, all electricians should either be self-certifiers, so 'approved' by their organisation, or (sort of) approved by LABC prior to work commencing.

Landlords and business owners, are you aware that premises & rental properties are required by law to have an electrical inspection and test report at regular intervals to ensure the safety of the wiring'

Again, not well worded at all and prone to being picked apart. There is a duty on landlords and company owners that their electrical installation is safe to use and there is a requirement for adequate maintainance. How that is acheived is down to individual circumstances.

 

[ColJack]

given that the LABC test installations for the DIYer and that doing your own electrics are not illegal then "approved" is not needed..
the kid next door can wire your house for you as long as the LABC are called in to inspect and test the job then it's all above board..

 

[mikhailfaradayski]

.....doesn't that just devalue the aims of part p legislation.......

When something has no worth, its hard to de-value it

Please see one of the many hundreds of threads about how KAK Part P is.

Nevertheless, whilst it is a law, it would be advised to adhere to it. You never know, the government might have a stealth tax strategy growing here-

-Make a law that carries a £5000 fine should you choose to break it.
-Do Absolutely NOTHING at all to police the law.
-Let that sit for a few years until there are lots of people who have unwittingly or dilberately broke it.
-Employ new teams of vulture like building inspector who can go round the country collecting £5K from every house in the country, Cher Ching, more moat cleaning!

 

[Paul_C]

-Let that sit for a few years until there are lots of people who have unwittingly or dilberately broke it.

The statute of limitations on building regulations is pretty short though.

I have no doubt the LABC's would like to see that changed, however, and the way some of them behave I'm sure they'd like to see retroactive regulations as well!

 

[mikhailfaradayski]

Hi Paul,

How long is the statute of limitation for this example?

Whose to say the MPs and co can't change it at a moments notice after a secret review?

 

[Paul_C]

How long is the statute of limitation for this example?

Building Regs. enforcement was always limited to 6 months, although I believe they pushed through changes to extend that to 2 years for certain contraventions. Here's the document when it was at the proposal stage, which suggests that it relates only to "energy conservation" measures:

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/corporate/pdf/longer-time.pdf

Whose to say the MPs and co can't change it at a moments notice after a secret review?

Indeed. And the way this government seems to be headed, I really would not be surprised if they tried to make new measures retroactive. Alarmed yes, but not surprised.