Are you really worried about the installation or minor works certificate?
I thought we were discussing the notification of a "new circuit"? AIUI, the OP appears to be proposing to do the work and then get an electrician to self-certify it, and BAS's concern is that this would involve lying on the part of the electrician.
Kind Regards, John
I noticed the quotes from the installation certificate and I would agree one should not be signing that you have done some thing which in fact you have not done. However at the end of the day the installation certificate is not the important bit it's the compliance or completion certificate which is the important one and they are issued by council or scheme provider.
In theroy there is no need for a installation certificate to even exist in order to get a completion certificate. It worries me when people talk about an installation certificate as if it is a legal requirement as they may not get the certificates that are legal as a result.
OK we may submit an installation certificate in order to get a completion or compliance certificate but it is up to the LABC or scheme provider to decide if the person signing the installation certificate is trustworthy enough to issue the completion or compliance certificate without further investigation. So should I do a rotten job and fudge up an installation certificate and submit it to the council and on the back of it they issue a completion certificate and latter some one is killed then the council will need to show that they took reasonable precautions to ensure my work was up to standard.
Clearly if I have qualifications as an electrician they have good cause to do nothing more than a casual glance to see if it's good, and if I am completely without any formal qualification they would need to do a more stringent set of tests. But they are responsible for ensuring site safety, in the same way the scheme provider is responsible for don't reasonable checks to see the electricians work is up to scratch.
So if there was a death the scheme provider would need to show how the checked the electricians work. If it was found the work inspected have inconsistent results they would need to show why they did not think this was reason for further inspections. If an electrician used his privilege of being a member of a scheme to simply make money selling compliance certificates then the scheme provider should be don't enough checks to show this was the case and remove him from their list.
However this was one of the points raised at the review and there seems to be two major problems. One was very few electricians had been expelled from being scheme members and the second was the law as it was at the time does not allow scheme providers to share black list names. So the electrician can simply swap provider, as to if this loop hole is now plugged I don't know?
Although with the Emma Shaw case the electrical foreman was found guilty that was before Part P started. As to what would happen today is another story and it would be interesting to see a summary of a modern court case.