Installation rules regarding Part P

Joined
18 Feb 2015
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Location
London
Country
United Kingdom
If an electrician who is not Part P registered installs new power points, light fittings and consumer unit throughout a house as part of a refurbishment, does it comply with building regs if the installation certificate at the end of the renovation is carried out by a Part P registered electrician and passes the test?

Thanks
 
Sponsored Links
If Building Control were not involved in the refurbishment then it is of no concern to them.
The person who certified the work is responsible for registering the completed work with your Local Authority Building Control through
his/her Competent Persons Scheme.
Whether that is legal is really down to the Scheme Operator and whether they have decided to accept third party testing.
All you should be concerned about is that you get an Electrical Installation Certificate from the Electrician and a Building Regulation Compliance notice from the
Scheme Operator.
 
I have been issued an Electrical Installation Certificate (pass) by an NICEIC approved contractor... does this mean i can rest assured that the electrics have been installed correctly?
I just don't have any Part P details about the electrician who installed the electrics during the refurb, he was sub-contracted by the build team appointed to carry out the works... perhaps i don't need them then if i have a certificate?
 
Okay so you have the EIC. And NICEIC have effectively stated your electrics have been installed correctly.
The key thing is that you should receive the Building Control Registration Notice within a few weeks.
If not you should chase it up with NICEIC.
This is the most important document since you may require it should sell the house in the future.
 
Sponsored Links
Okay, that's great advice and i'll make sure i chase that up with NICEIC if i don't hear from them.
Wrong forum section... but is this the same with Gas? I have a GAS Safe certificate following the refurb but do i need anything more than this?
 
Last edited:
Has the NICEIC guy signed the certificate that says the following:
I being the person responsible for the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing of the electrical installation (as indicated by my signature below), particulars of which are described above, having exercised reasonable skill and care when carrying out the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing, hereby CERTIFY that the said work for which I have been responsible is to the best of my knowledge and belief in accordance with BS 7671…..?

If he has signed this then he has LIED, as he did not carry out the design and construction. Also, if he was not there to witness/supervise the installation then he will have been unable to inspect that the cable routes comply with BS7671.

The last I heard, NICEIC had opted NOT to be a part of the proposed "Third Party Certification" scheme.
 
Has the NICEIC guy signed the certificate that says the following:
I being the person responsible for the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing of the electrical installation (as indicated by my signature below), particulars of which are described above, having exercised reasonable skill and care when carrying out the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing, hereby CERTIFY that the said work for which I have been responsible is to the best of my knowledge and belief in accordance with BS 7671…..?

If he has signed this then he has LIED, as he did not carry out the design and construction. Also, if he was not there to witness/supervise the installation then he will have been unable to inspect that the cable routes comply with BS7671.

The last I heard, NICEIC had opted NOT to be a part of the proposed "Third Party Certification" scheme.

Has he though? He isn't claiming that he carried out the Design, Construcion, Inspection and Testing, he's just saying that he is responsible for it. If he is happy to accept that responsibility, then where's the issue? (Isn't langauge a wonderful thing - it can often mean almost anything you want it to mean :)
 
Indeed.

It can mean almost anything, and everything else, if you don't read it properly or if you ignore bits you don't like.

Let me help you.

I being the person responsible for the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing of the electrical installation (as indicated by my signature below), particulars of which are described above, having exercised reasonable skill and care when carrying out the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing, hereby CERTIFY that the said work for which I have been responsible is to the best of my knowledge and belief in accordance with BS 7671…..
 
I have seen where with a number of jobs there has been an error with paperwork the electrician thinking (or so he claimed) his scheme operator was not issuing a compliance certificate and instead it would be included in the completion certificate issued by the LABC.

Also a EIC can be issued even when it's not a new circuit. Since you live in England the compliance or completion certificate are only required if there is a new circuit, altering and extending an old circuit does not require them. We argue about what a new circuit is but as far as you go having a EIC from a NICEIC registered electrician is likely all you need.

As to selling house since likely built before 2004 it will not have compliance or completion certificates for all circuits so unlikely the solicitor will ask for them where there are EIC to cover any new work.
 
Indeed.

It can mean almost anything, and everything else, if you don't read it properly or if you ignore bits you don't like.

Let me help you.

I being the person responsible for the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing of the electrical installation (as indicated by my signature below), particulars of which are described above, having exercised reasonable skill and care when carrying out the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing, hereby CERTIFY that the said work for which I have been responsible is to the best of my knowledge and belief in accordance with BS 7671…..

Quite right - not sure how I missed that - mea culpa

Although - it is still possible that the person signing the form did not actually carry out the work, but is taking responsibility for it.
 
Although - it is still possible that the person signing the form did not actually carry out the work, but is taking responsibility for it.
Indeed. It is, IMO, a very badly worded declaration. In two separate places it describes the person signing as the person "responsible for" the work - which would by no means necessarily be the person who carried out (all or any of) the work. However, they then slip that bit in the middle which seems to imply that the person signing actually carried out the work. If one takes that wording literally, it must be very common for the declaration to be signed 'incorrectly' (what BAS would probably call 'lying') - I would imagine that it's quite common for the (usually 'qualified') person who is "responsible for" the work, and who signs the declaration, to have actually supervised work carried out at least partially by a more junior person, rather than done it all him/herself, and that even the relevant officialdom accepts that situation.

I have a suspicion that, in order to properly represent the intent, the "...having exercised reasonable skill and care when carrying out the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing ..." should probably have been worded something like "... reasonable skill and care having been exercised in carrying out Design, Construction, Inspection and Testing...".

Kind Regards, John
 
it must be very common for the declaration to be signed 'incorrectly' (what BAS would probably call 'lying')
You say that as if it's a somewhat odd interpretation.

Simple questions, relating to the "when carrying out..." phrase when the declaration is signed by someone who did not carry it out:

Is it true, or false?

If false, does the person signing know it to be false?

Is the purpose of him signing it to make people think he did carry it out, or is he signing it expecting not to be believed?

What's another word for a deliberate untruth knowingly told in order to deceive?​
 
it must be very common for the declaration to be signed 'incorrectly' (what BAS would probably call 'lying')
You say that as if it's a somewhat odd interpretation.
No, not odd - just 'unhelpful'. However, as I said, I believe that everyone (including those who officially view and/or 'police' the signed declarations) accept (and are happy with the fact) that the declarations are often signed by people who have supervised, rather that personally carried out, at least some of the design, construction, inspection and testing work. Whilst strictly correct, to call this 'lying' is not, IMO , particularly helpful. If one wanted to totally avoid that 'lying', I would suspect that chaos would result - since I imagine that there would be quite a high proportion of cases in which no-one was able to sign the declaration, as currently worded, without 'lying'.

As I said, I personally feel that the wording of the declaration needs changing to reflect reality, such that a person 'responsible for' all aspects of the work could sign it, without 'lying', even if (s)he had not personally undertaken every aspect of the design, construction, inspection and testing.

Kind Regards, John
 
Until it is changed, or until you abandon your utterly ridiculous refusal to recognise the special case of an employer/employee relationship, it will remain a lie. Whether you consider that helpful 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
Back
Top