installation notification

[scarypants]

But what form/report was filled in by the electrician saying the installation complied to part p?
Not trying to hijack this post but I'm interested!

 

[Adam_151]

There isn't a form as such, when you submit the notifcation you are submitting to your scheme provider a statement that you have worked to BS7671 and the building regs, your provider, having accessed you, takes you at your word. The provider or the LABC then generate a building regs cert (I'm not 100% which party actually do it)

 

[scarypants]

There isn't a form as such, when you submit the notifcation you are submitting to your scheme provider a statement that you have worked to BS7671 and the building regs, your provider, having accessed you, takes you at your word. The provider or the LABC then generate a building regs cert (I'm not 100% which party actually do it)

My original point was that the guidelines regarding BS7671, implies that a person(s) installing a new system should be the ones that inspect and test it, but building controls under notifiable work can employ a third party to test your installation, even though they have not installed the system. So technically they should not be testing it.
Then I mentioned at what point does a competent electrician fill in a report or form stating the installation complies to part p as that is a legal document and BS7671 is not. Because an EIC is not summited but that don't seem to matter as it's not a legal requirement, but a part p cert is.
not saying it's wrong or right!
but a bit cockeyed

 

[RF Lighting]

I don't think you are reading this quite right.

Anyone who is working to BS7671 MUST complete either an EIC or a MWC (which ever is apropriate)

Your work must comply with building regs, regardless of what standard you are working to.

If you have your work inspected by the LABC, they are making sure it complies with buildings regs. They couldn't care less if it doesn't comply with BS7671.

Someone who is registered with a self certification scheme can show compliance with buildings regs by working to BS7671.

Basically to comply with BS7671 you must sign your own work off, (or complete a three part EIC).

To comply with buildings regs you can either join a self certification scheme and be assessed to show your work is compliant, or you can have it inspected by the LABC.

 

[ebee]

Someone with a scheme is contractually obliged to follow BS7671.
When LABC get someone to inspect/test they use BS7671 also.
However Part P does not specifically require it just that it is reasonably safe . (From a purely electrical viewpoint)
The approved doc Part P (which is guidance only) suggests BS7671 or another European equivalent but does not exclude others.

I`m sure that sooner or later (probably much later) some smart alec will work to a standard of a civilised country (Not BS 7671 or a european one) or their own standard then challange LABC when they fail it to BS 7671 in some way. Well OK it might not happen but it could.

Confusing innit?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

building controls under notifiable work can employ a third party to test your installation, even though they have not installed the system. So technically they should not be testing it.

Have you never seen a 3-part EIC?

Confusing innit?

Not really.

 

[scarypants]

Have you never seen a 3-part EIC?

Oh yes seen them filled them in, but don't recall filling anything in stating this installation complies to part p.

 

[bongos]

Oh yes seen them filled them in, but don't recall filling anything in stating this installation complies to part p.

Thats because there is no mention of Part P on them. The EIC is completed to state compliance with BS7671. If you were completing work in an industrial/commercial environment you would still complete an EIC in line with BS7671 but Part P would have no relevance.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

That's because EICs have nothing to do with Building Regulations compliance.

And remember it's not just Part P - when comeone certifies that work complies with the Building Regulations they are, or should be, certifying that it complies with all of them - Part A, Part B, Part C.....

 

[scarypants]

So now lets review:

So EIC/schedules of inspect and test results filled in by competent person( done all qualifcations 2330, 2391/2 2382 etc...and registered with domestic installers scheme, full scope) who installed the system. This is not legal doc, though complies to BS7671

Another installation installed by tom/dick/harry off the streets (i'll have a ago at that can't be too difficult!). Then nice man from BCs comes around signs it off under part p certs and this is a legal doc.


Summary;

Cockeyed

 

[ban-all-sheds]

This is not legal doc

What do you mean it's not legal?

In what way is it illegal?

Another installation installed by tom/dick/harry off the streets (i'll have a ago at that can't be too difficult!). Then nice man from BCs comes around signs it off under part p certs and this is a legal doc.

Another installation planned by someone unable to certify his work as compliant with the Building Regulations.

He submits details of the work, and explains in what way he will comply with the requirements of the Building Regulations, including the one to make reasonable provision in the design and installation of the electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering it from fire or injury.

Building Control examine his application, and approve/reject it.

If approved, he carries out the work, and during and after it LABC carry out inspections and tests to ensure that the work complies with the requirements of the Building Regulations.

If satisfied, they issue a Building Regulations completion certificate.

Summary;

Cockeyed

Summary;

I still don't think you get it.

 

[ericmark]

I think with the LABC there is a difference between should and does! Once you pay the LABC their fee they are responsible for safety. And to do this they would in theory need to check every cable before it is covered and test every cable after. Also the request would need to be very detailed for them to ensure the work would comply with the current safety requirements.

I am sure if they did all required it would cost more than £100 per £2000 worth of work done.

But they use common sense and they assess the ability of person doing the work and modify their inspection criteria to match the perceived ability of person doing the job.

As of yet I have not seen any court cases where a DIY'er has sued the LABC for delectation of duty in letting sub standard work being issued with a completion cert. I am sure some day it will happen and then there will be a flood of claims like has happened when the child protection agency failed in their duty. Once it is splashed in the press everyone will try it on. I am surprised the builders from hell programs have never latched on to the building inspectors responsibility?

 

[scarypants]

b-a-s, I do get it and understand how it works, just feel it should be done another way.

Regarding the EIC not being a statutory doc meaning it has not been passed in parliament as a legal document never said it was illegal
I am aware the Electricity at works act is a statutory document and BS7671 is a guide to that and the OSG is a guide to BS7671 as are GNs.
I hope you don't think I am an idiot a little confused sometimes maybe

 

[ban-all-sheds]

OK, so let's try this:

So EIC/schedules of inspect and test results filled in by competent person( done all qualifcations 2330, 2391/2 2382 etc...and registered with domestic installers scheme, full scope) who installed the system. This is not legal doc, though complies to BS7671

1) His electrical qualifications mean that he can comply with P1 by working to BS 7671.
2) His registration status means that he can (should be able) to comply with all the other Building Regulations, including the notification, whereupon LABC will issue the completion certificate.

Another installation installed by tom/dick/harry off the streets (i'll have a ago at that can't be too difficult!). Then nice man from BCs comes around signs it off under part p certs and this is a legal doc.

1) TDH is also legally bound to comply with P1. If he has no other source of information on how to do it properly then Approved Document P will tell him a way to comply.

Just as with any law, the general principle applies that being ignorant of it is not an excuse for not complying with it.

2) Hopefully the nice man from LABC will not sign it off if it does not comply.

b-a-s, I do get it and understand how it works, just feel it should be done another way.

Such as?

 

[scarypants]

Such as?

Argument well put, I don't know the answer but I still feel that it should.