Yes. So the installation may have been INSTALLED illegally, but is not illegal in itself.
Illegal installation
- Thread starter Theo61
- Start date
Yes. So the installation may have been INSTALLED illegally, but is not illegal in itself.
Sponsored Links
You'd need a lawyer to answer that one. I'm tempted to think that if the installation had been installed in a fashion which was non-compliant with Part P (and I mean Part P, not notification), that the installation itself might thereby become 'illegal' (and it's certainly subject to a requirement for rectification) - but lawyers have their own way of interpreting things
Kind Regards, John
It's a bit meh.
It's like driving a car to deliver to a takeaway without a driving licence. You drove illegally, but that doesn't make the delivery of the takeaway, or the takeaway itself, illegal.
Either way, my comment was Jack Dee.
It's like driving a car to deliver to a takeaway without a driving licence. You drove illegally, but that doesn't make the delivery of the takeaway, or the takeaway itself, illegal.
Either way, my comment was Jack Dee.
Can't argue with that. However, if you were manufacturing the car and failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that the car complied with required safety standards (which is a sort-of rough paraphrase of Part P) you could well end up with a car which was 'illegal' (for sale or use on public roads). That's why I'd leave this one for the lawyers ... even on a Friday evening!
Cheers, John
Sponsored Links
Yep and getting the electrics checked will put his piece of mind at rest. Apart from obvious dangers from dangerous wiring there are far more important things to worry about when buying a house, such as how good the structure is.
It is only illegal if you get caught.
As in this case the OP is speculating illegal activity (in whatever form) and until he does what he should have done in the first place, that is get a EICR, he and us will be non the wiser.
How anyone can consider buying a house without getting the utilities checked is beyond me.
In a general sense, obviously, but if I understand his question/concern correctly, I don't think that an EICR would, or could, put his mind at rest as regards what I think (maybe incorrectly!) he was asking. If his (I would say unnecessary) worries were about the possible legal repercussions of buying a house which may have had undergone un-notified notifiable work, an EICR would (a) not tell him whether or not previous work had been notified and (b) would not alter the legal position as regards any previously un-notified work.
Quite so.
Kind Regards, John
As I've said, I suspect his fear is that he might inherit some legal responsibilities if notifiable work had not been notified in the past. However, despite one seemingly ludicrous case that has been reported in this forum, I think that is really not something to worry about. No-one seems aware of even a single case in which the 'perpetrator' has been prosecuted for failure to notify electrical work, so (despite the one apparent case!), to attempt to purse a subsequent owner over such matters would seeming vanishingly unlikely.
Kind Regards, John
We did have a nutcase here last year who believed, or claimed to believe, just that.
I don't recall it as a nutcase (unless you're referring to the LABC in question!) - IIRC it was a report of a genuine case in which an LA were attempting to pursue a new owner of a house in relation to non-notification of electrical work by a previous owner. I would have loved such a case to have got to court, and to have been there so I could have seen the face of the the judge/magistrate! Of course, if they believed there was a dangerous installation, they could probably take enforcement action, regardless of current ownership, but IIRC the only issue being pursued was the non-notification. It's really on a par with pursuing a new owner of a car in relation to the driving/parking offences of a previous owner, or the new owner of a house in relation to its use under previous ownership as a brothel!
Having said all that, my recollections may be distorted - maybe you can find the thread in question?
Kind Regards, John
Thanks - but, unfortunately, that's not the right one. That thread is a 9-page argument/discussion (which degenerated into only-too-familiar personality clashes after about page 3) about how ridiculous it would be for an LABC to prosecute someone because a previous owner had failed to notify electrical work.
As I said, the thread I'm talking about was, IIRC, related to a case in which we were being told that someone actually was being pursued by an LABC because of non-notication by a previous owner. I'll see if I can find it.
Kind Regards, John
Bloody hell talk about mountains and mole hills, what was or wasn't "illegally" installed is not really important what is is that the installation is safe for use and compliant, I have wired up a new build garage (12 circuits) and carried out allot of electrical work at home just because its DIY does not make any more dangerous or lower quality then work carried out by an electrician and in allot of cases I would hazard a guess they DIY work can be far better quality then some professional work carried out.
What you need is an EICR to find out if the installation is actually safe or not
What you need is an EICR to find out if the installation is actually safe or not
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
