Can I do this as a DIYer???

[Goldberg]

The only legal requirement for the actual work is that:

Reasonable provision shall be made in the design, installation, inspection and testing of electrical installations in order to protect persons from fire or injury.

Actually, that legal requirement has been superceded by a lesser one, i.e. there is currently no requirement for inspection and testing.

 

[Goldberg]

As it turns out that was a superfluous qualifier - you were quite correct, the latest iteration of the SI does refer specifically to BS 7671:2001

There was nothing superfluous about it - I was less than 100% certain, and "AFAIK" conveyed that uncertainty.

Is there some doubt in your mind over whether the only reference to BS 7671:2001 is in the definition of the term "special location"?

You've stated that it's the only reference, and that's good enough for me.

I would have thought that it'd be more efficient for you to make it as clear as possible, but if you want to wait and see if anybody manages to discover by intuition what you mean then that's up to you.

I suspect that, in practice, the opportunity vaporised at 12:53 GMT on August 4th 2009.

I fear though that you risk people getting bored before they come up with an opinion which you think is relevant.

Life is inherently risky.

You see the problem is that your question as written cannot bring forth any useful opinions.

No, that's what you see. I see something different, because we are different people with different experiences, perceptions, and perspectives.

If we return to the first version of your question

I was merely soliciting opinions about how a punter would resolve the apparent conflict that arises from the explicit reference and the general "reasonable provision" requirement.

the answer is that they should read the legislation more carefully, and see that the explicit reference is relevant only to Building Regulation 12(5)b, and not to Regulations 4 or 6 or to P1 of Schedule 1.

Once they do that the "apparent" conflict is no more.

That's certainly a valid answer to the second version of the question.

See what you can intuit when you really try?

 

[Paul_C]

The only legal requirement for the actual work is that:

Reasonable provision shall be made in the design, installation, inspection and testing of electrical installations in order to protect persons from fire or injury.

Actually, that legal requirement has been superceded by a lesser one, i.e. there is currently no requirement for inspection and testing.

Whether the original P.1 clause or an amended one removing inspection & testing, my point is that since its inception in 2005 Part P has never contained any requirement for installations to follow BS7671 in any shape or form. Hence my statement that if I wanted to wire to American or Australian standards in my home, there's nothing to stop me.

 

[Goldberg]

Whether the original P.1 clause or an amended one removing inspection & testing, my point is that since its inception in 2005 Part P has never contained any requirement for installations to follow BS7671 in any shape or form.

We're going around in circles a bit here, because a while back I wrote this:

I acknowledge the absence of any legal compulsion to follow the entirety of BS 7671.

Regarding the reference to BS 7671:2001 (instead of :2008), I foresee that the average punter will become befuddled over the need to refer to the 16th Edition for the definition of zones, bearing in mind that they're also encouraged to follow 'The Latest Edition' for the purpose of making reasonable provisions for safety. To cap it all, they could be forgiven for thinking that they need not do any testing whatsoever.

Masterful it certainly isn't.

Luckily for those punters who know about this forum, they can attempt to become unbefuddled by reading this topic, and, if they believe what they read, discover for themselves that there is absolutely no conflict at all.