Notifying a job you didn't do?

[SparkyNinja]

O.k. where to start,

I have only been working for my company for about a month now. I have come on board as QS but they've made me manager in that time. Now I could spend ages saying about the things they've not been doing but I guess thats another thread altogether.

Anyways, last year they were contacted by a customer who wanted a test done. This customer had some polish builder do his extension and a full rewire. They completed the job, got paid, went home for christmas, then never came back. So this gentleman has an extension done and can't get it notified. He went through all the channels in the first instance with planning etc.
This is when he called us in, we went in and did a periodic inspection. Now my director insists she said to the customer that 'we cant sign off the work, and wont be able to notify it', but from my understanding of how much the directors know about running a business I am slightly unimpressed.

So,

we went in, did a periodic report and sent it to building control. They sent it back saying they need an NICEIC company to do notification. 3 months later, we were NICEIC enrolled and an engineer was sent back to redo.

Sigh... He sat in their lounge and just copied results from one certificate to the other, copying it onto a NEW INSTALLATION CERT and actually writing 'test carried out by engineer no longer with company' on the limitations, this was then signed by the QS at the time and sent off.

The results of the periodic showed no gas bond, no earthing to lights and no fire hoods.

So as it currently stands,

All the certs stand for bo***cks, and they're asking me to notify the job.
I've told them the numerous reasons why I cant and was given the number for the building inspector. I discussed it with him, and he completley agreed with me and said that they have fallen into a trap.

He then went on to say that 'some' electricians would do a 'trace inspection' which involved tracing all the wiring and ensuring of no limitations what so ever, and then notifying upon satisfactory completion...


.... anyone else done this before???

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[SparkyNinja]

Yeah we had a guy carry out remedial work so it 'should' be ok, but the certs filled with limitations.. i mean, how can a reference number be a limitation ffs

 

[Chri5]

What's the problem with taking the job on as new?

Doing a survey, checking and documenting, doing full remedial, bonding, replacing lighting wires and submitting the work to LABC via a scheme provider.

I can see why you shouldn't (and rightly won't) touch it without remedial works post survey.

But if you know it's wrong, just get the wrong bits sorted and the IEC can fly in and the job becomes a good one.

The firms client has no choice but to pick up the costs, but if your director suggested otherwise, then a fair thing would be to 50:50 the cost.

At the moment all they seem to be doing is looking for a quick fix, and that could be illegal and (potentially) dangerous. If no one is prepared to pay for the work then you can very correctly refuse to sign the IEC which would make you liable for any issues associated with a no complient installation.

 

[SparkyNinja]

The problem is my company sent guys last year to do the remedials, but the end conclusion is still that nothing we have done is notifiable. We can keep certifying and certifying with PI and MW but the initial re-wire wasn't our work, and even if I personally go their and do a really in depth PI, I'm still not supposed to provide an installation certificate (Approved document part P, section 1.29)

So my hands are tied..

 

[ban-all-sheds]

This customer had some polish builder do his extension and a full rewire. They completed the job,

So they did issue an EIC then?

I thought not.

In which case they had not completed the job.

got paid, went home for christmas, then never came back.

So he paid them even though they hadn't finished?

What's the betting the customer chose them to do the work purely on price, and not because of recommendations, references, membership of appropriate trade associations etc?

I wonder if he still thinks he got a good deal?

So this gentleman has an extension done and can't get it notified.

How could he ever have done?

Even if the electricians had returned?

For from your description it sounds as if they were not registered, in which case notification after the event was never an option that was open to the customer.

The only option that was ever open to him was notification in advance, for which he would have paid a fee to LABC, and if he had done that then it was always LABC's responsibility to inspect & test and confirm compliance with the Building Regulations...

They sent it back saying they need an NICEIC company to do notification

I wonder if NAPIT, BSI etc are ever going to get off their ****s and look after the legitimate interests of the people who pay their wages by putting a stop to this illegal restraint of trade?

 

[SparkyNinja]

I spoke to the building inspector and he actually visited the site during the installation, he claims (after I made it blatently obvious he must have twigged that they weren't registered) that he never knew that they were the 'electricians' and just assumed they were labourers.... I mean.....

COME ON!!!!

 

[ban-all-sheds]

It doesn't matter what he did, or did not, or should, or should not have twigged.

When the Building Regulations submission was made, what did it say about how the work would be certified? Did it say that it would be self-certified by a registered entity, or not?

 

[SparkyNinja]

It doesn't matter what he did, or did not, or should, or should not have twigged.

When the Building Regulations submission was made, what did it say about how the work would be certified? Did it say that it would be self-certified by a registered entity, or not?

Well of course it would have to to go ahead, I have issues with this guy though as he went round there last week after I refused to notify and was saying we're dragging it on., and that I'll only take me a minute to notify it. I didn't believe he would say that except the painter and decorator round their witnessed it.

I aint notifying what I havn't done and that's that.

 

[jason1958]

You can not legally notify someone elses work.
No client, employer or labc can require you to do so. Full stop.


Legally.
1. LABC may choose to accept a Satisfactory PIR.

2. LABC must serve a Section 36 notice within 12 months of works completion for corrective works. This does not affect a LABC right (or anyone else) to apply for an injunction for the same purpose (Cottingham v Attey Bower & Jones).

3. IEE regs wording involves Require ("Must") & Guidance ("Should").
Fool a council who goes with a Section 36 notice where the issue is Guidance, because any lawyer & judge will chuck it out immediately.

4. Part P itself comprises legal & guidance sections.
Schedule 1 shall not require anything to be done except for the purpose of securing reasonable standards of health and safety for persons in or about buildings (and any others who may be affected by buildings, or matters connected with buildings). Part P can not impose any further obligation and this is common to most BR incidentally.


This is why councils try to avoid Section 36 orders as a) cost b) they screw them up and c) much of BR is actually guidance with legal aspects based on reasonableness & safety. Planning Consultants & Lawyers make short shrift of BR including Part P for developers because the cost of their time is so small compared to the savings possible. Hence new build housing is often somewhat worse than many realise!

So it comes down to the LABC.
They are keeping quiet hoping the client fixes it.

18th regs, or 17th amended, need to add that all cable routing shall be photographed as part of the documentation process. This is long overdue because it allows better inspection of design assumptions at the time of which there is little or no evidence once plasters in.
I advise anyone to photograph all cable routing, no matter who does it, because it makes it easier to kick sloppy sparks as much as sloppy DIYers .

Most common cause of out of zone wiring used to be where the reel ran out and it saved materials & labour in replacement through contorted runs. Zones came in 1987 15th, so I hope Part P education never makes people assume that is the case with all wiring (not that it will stop people choosing to knock a nail right in the middle above a wiring accessory, I mean why do they do it?!).

 

[jason1958]

> no gas bond, no earthing to lights

That worries me most, and the LABC may well S36 the client.
- No spark with knowledge of IEE wiring regs would not MEB to gas
- No spark would cutoff earth wires in ceiling roses or backboxes?

Or do you mean he only did a partial rewire & some lights without CPC?
- You can do separate final circuit for extension lights
- However it is not ideal if there is a CU change

Ok, you could follow the NICEIC guideline re RCBO old 2-wire lights, ensure no class-1 lights, notice on CU about no CPC on affected light circuits, written statement informing client about lack of lighting CPC and need to u/g kept by client & installer.


Q - Anyone know polish wiring regs out of curiosity?

I wonder if they route cables (exactly) to UK IEE zones - or not.
I know some polish architects, they might know.


Just glanced around a few council websites.
Amused to find that a DIYer following the wording on one could believe they can replace (maintenance) a broken outside IP lightswitch without notifying LABC. Technically they can not, they would need to pay LABC, get a spark, or encapsulate it in silicone - probably out of spite.

Perhaps the LABC was being particularly charitable, ok back to the real world.

 

[Spark123]

Isn't replacing an outside light switch:
(a) replacing any fixed electrical equipment which does not include the provision of—
(i) any new fixed cabling; or

(ii) a consumer unit;"?
which would therefore be a non notifiable activity?

 

[jason1958]

> Isn't replacing an outside light switch:
> (a) replacing any fixed electrical equipment which does not include the provision of—
> (i) any new fixed cabling; or
> (ii) a consumer unit;"?
> which would therefore be a non notifiable activity?

Correct, thank you for the correction.

Under BR AD P P1 6 Apr 2006 "Additional Notes" it says...
"b. Replacement, repair and maintenance jobs are generally not notifiable, even if carried out in a kitchen or special location or associated with a special installation".

I can see no exclusion against replacing existing SWA which is damaged.
- It is not new fixed cabling
- It is in a special location but is a replacement job

Damage such as mechanical (spade), UV (unlikely), electrical (advised on PIR by IR or EFLI readings espec. if 2-core with swa as CPC). Interesting.

 

[jason1958]

From AD P P1 6 April 2006.

My emphasis.

Third party certification.
1.28 Unregistered installers should NOT themselves arrange for a third part to carry out inspection and testing. The third part - not having supervised the work from the outset - would NOT be in a position to verify that the installation work complied fully with BS 7671:2001 requirements. An electrical installation certificate can be issued ONLY by the installer responsible for the installation work.

1.29 A third party COULD only sign a BS 7671:2001 Periodic Inspection Report or similar. The report would indicate that electrical safety tests had been carried out on the installation which met BS 7671:2001 criteria, but it could not verify that the installation complied fuly with BS 7671:2001 requirements - for example with regard to routing of hidden cables.


So AD P indicates circumstances where PIR could be issued in place of EIC with the usual exclusion about routing of hidden cables.

LABC need to make their position clear.
Clients may need to seek their own insurance against bad/dying/vanishing/unregistered/bankrupted electricians. Two sparks I know had strokes on the job in the past 15yrs. It can be very physically demanding, both were smokers.

I have never liked 1.34d "for unusually large or complex installations only, detailed plans." It would really help if plans were detailed re photos & design considerations. BS7671 gives examples of the most basic isometric diagrams required, but cable routing can be so useful for subsequent extension jobs.