Does part P go far enough?

[holmslaw]

..

 

[sealeon]

I am a doctor. MB ChB, FRCS, FCEM.

Any idea what's wrong with bas?

I would suggest opinionitos but obviously quote me

 

[ban-all-sheds]

BAS read your message board.

At the time I wrote the above I hadn't.

I am happy and glad there are organisations that govern trades.

So why did you say "NO one with an apprentiship and trade qualifications should have to join a scheme"?

The fact is your argument has already been fought and lost.

I'm not trying to resurrect old arguments - it was not I who started this topic...

I am sorry about that but please dont take it out on the trades by implying it is all about me or any other tradesmen trying to make money off the public.

I didn't say it was, only that when you start saying things like "do you think someones time is worth nothing", and "you need to be competent and checked because I had to be and if I do and I do the same work shouldnt you otherwise we may as well have no trades",and then start calling for increased restrictions on what people other than tradesmen can do even though you have no evidence that increased restrictions are justified and you don't care what it costs them, then it does start to sound like sour grapes because the way you earn your living is not protected.

As i have said I dont think DIY is wrong but I do believe that people should be checked for competence if they are working in the industry and a DIYers work proved safe and unless you know of a better way which you have never mentioned in your posts schemes are the only way.
What do YOU think we should do?

There are two separate issues there - one is the registration of professionals and the other is checking DIY work.

Regarding the former I have no problem with compulsory scheme membership (although I don't see why it has to cost what NICEIC/NAPIT/ECA/UTCAA charge) because I think there should be regular checks on the competence of people charging for their services, and there should be guarantees and insurance etc.

And I think the entry qualifications should be higher - if I employ a professional I'd want him to be better qualified to do the job than I am.

As for checking DIY work, in principle it's a good idea, as would be encouraging people to learn more and become more competent. In practice though it's hard to see how the costs of any sensible testing regime could be justified. The world is full of good ideas that aren't practical.

 

[sealeon]

BAS I am not quite sure you are reading what I am saying quite right here and I think you may have mis understood some of it or maybe I aint no good at putting my point over in text but it is quite clear its a bit of a dodgy subject that we just aint gonna see eye to eye on all of it.So can I go home and have a headache pill and a lie down

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[sealeon]

So why did you say "NO one with an apprentiship and trade qualifications should have to join a scheme
I'm not trying to resurrect old arguments - it was not I who started the topic
I didn't say it was, only that when you start saying things like "do you think someones time is worth nothing", and "you need to be competent and checked because I had to be and if I do and I do the same work shouldnt you otherwise we may as well have no trades",and then start calling for increased restrictions on what people other than tradesmen can do even though you have no evidence that increased restrictions are justified and you don't care what it costs them, then it does start to sound like sour grapes because the way you earn your living is not protected
There are two separate issues there - one is the registration of professionals and the other is checking DIY work.

Regarding the former I have no problem with compulsory scheme membership (although I don't see why it has to cost what NICEIC/NAPIT/ECA/UTCAA charge) because I think there should be regular checks on the competence of people charging for their services, and there should be guarantees and insurance etc.

And I think the entry qualifications should be higher - if I employ a professional I'd want him to be better qualified to do the job than I am.

As for checking DIY work, in principle it's a good idea, as would be encouraging people to learn more and become more competent. In practice though it's hard to see how the costs of any sensible testing regime could be justified. The world is full of good ideas that aren't practical.

I dont think someone who is in the trade should have to join a scheme for domestics
I didnt start it
Not quite sure I said that
Totally agree the cost is to high I have to pay it
I just think a life is worth any amount of money
but agree its to expensive

and I dont want to talk about it anymore

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I just think a life is worth any amount of money

I have invented this wonderful new medical treatment.

It will save 1 life per year, but cost £5 billion per year, so taxes will have to go up by an enormous amount.

Still think a life is worth any amount of money?

 

[sealeon]

In the real world most people live in and on topic we are talking how much a hundred 2 hundred quid to a check.Run a risk assesment and you will see there are dangers by DIY electrical work and you need to do all you can to reduce the dangers it may not be the perfect solution but its the only one there is until some one like yourself comes up with something better.Like I have heard said people will always DIY and if you cant stop the danger you have to reduce it as much as you can.Schemes will do that

 

[ban-all-sheds]

In the real world most people live in and on topic we are talking how much a hundred 2 hundred quid to a check.

Is that realistic if all someone has done is add a socket?

Run a risk assesment and you will see there are dangers by DIY electrical work and you need to do all you can to reduce the dangers

No - you need to do all you can that is worth doing.

it may not be the perfect solution but its the only one there is until some one like yourself comes up with something better.

There never was a convincing case that anything needed doing in the first place.

Like I have heard said people will always DIY and if you cant stop the danger you have to reduce it as much as you can.Schemes will do that

How do Competent Person schemes affect DIY?

 

[sealeon]

Is that realistic if all someone has done is add a socket?

No - you need to do all you can that is worth doing

There never was a convincing case that anything needed doing in the first place.

How do Competent Person schemes affect DIY?

Didnt think a single socket had to be notified
How without checking the person doing the work would you know what was worth doing better safe than sorry is the best approach the choice is prove competence
There was obviously some reason it was brought in on facts and figures someone had researched if you have proof they were wrong you have the ammunition to fight it no one has
sorry my mistake meant building control

 

[sealeon]

I think it was all brought in to stop cowboy trades we agree that is a good thing
We know people will always do thier own work we know some DIYers make a good safe job but also know there are some really bad and dangerous jobs being done by DIYers.
So bassically the real problem is bad DIYers maybe?and not the good ones.So maybe BAS you should direct your temper tantrums at them?
As for changing things the government do it happened with poll tax
You also seem cofussed as to what your problem with it all is.Is it money control be specific cos your opinion keeps changing

 

[Spark123]

A socket or a light added in a special location, a kitchen or associated with a special installation is notifiable in England and Wales.
I'm sure you have seen some complete lash ups created by people who are time served and call themselves competent electricians.

 

[sealeon]

A socket or a light added in a special location, a kitchen or associated with a special installation is notifiable in England and Wales.
I'm sure you have seen some complete lash ups created by people who are time served and call themselves competent electricians.

You are not wrong I have but they will I think find it harder to carry on with some sort of licensing maybe and the competent scheme checks there work as an on going thing

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Didnt think a single socket had to be notified

It does in a kitchen, but I thought you wanted to check everything?

How without checking the person doing the work would you know what was worth doing better safe than sorry is the best approach the choice is prove competence

Assuming he can't, do you want to check any work he does, or only some of it?

There was obviously some reason it was brought in on facts and figures someone had researched

No - there were no facts and figures to justify it. It was brought in not on the basis if those (although highly specious ones were used as the public face of it), but instead after years of lobbying by NICEIC and the ECA who basically wanted a closed shop for electricians.

if you have proof they were wrong you have the ammunition to fight it no one has

It's a fight long since over - whenever this Govt announces a "consultation" you know they've already made up their mind.

FYI - these were the figures they supposedly based it on:

[code:1]Table 1b: Calculated annual average number of electrical incidents avoided in dwellings in E&W

Electrical Fatalities Non-fatal injuries Fire damage
installation to property
Shock Fire Shock Fire
Fixed wiring 0.3 0.5 37 39 720
Fixed appliance 0.6 2.4 21 50 1,020
Non-portable 0.8 0.1 41 24 370
Portable 2.1 3.7 133 57 258
Total 3.8 6.6 231 170 2,367[/code:1]

So more than half the savings in lives come from avoided accidents involving portable appliances, which of course are not covered by Part P.

Add to that the known fact that fire investigators will often put "electrical" rather than "unknown" as the cause in their reports and it all starts to look pretty flaky.

Including fire figures, on average there were 10.4 fatalities per year in England & Wales arising from fixed wiring and fixed appliances. And about 1,000,000 instances of DIY electrical installation work per year.

To put the deaths into perspective, that's about the same number of people who are killed each day on the roads. In 1999, about 28,000 people were killed or injured falling from ladders and steps in the home, and about 20 were drowned in garden ponds.

So no - there was never a safety case for Part P - it was all about increasing the influence, control, and income of the registration bodies, who as soon as the system of registration was in place immediately prostituted themselves by registering not just the traditional 2330/2360/2381/2391 qualified people, but anybody who could scrape through a 5-day NVQ and not electrocute themselves with a tester.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I wanted to break this out as a separate subject:

How without checking the person doing the work would you know what was worth doing better safe than sorry is the best approach the choice is prove competence

Genuine Q: what would you say was a satisfactory way for a DIYer to prove competence?