Shepherds hut electrics

[JohnW2]

I have heard that same principle applied to the Electricty at work regulations, yet those regulations only say "You must" or "you must not" they do not say "At work, you must" or "At work, you must not", thus they do not apply only at work but everywhere else too.

I think the people you've heard that from are probably being rather silly. For I start, I would expect something at the start of those regs to define what all the regs relate to but, even if it didn't, one surely has to take 'context' into account - I haven't looked for a long lime, but I imagine that, for example, the Highway Code often says "you must" or "you must not", without explaining that that only applied if one was driving or riding a vehicle

also every domestic dwelling or public place can become a place of work once you employ a decorator or a plumber or a joiner to work on your property therefore that potential of it becomming one is ever present.

That may make make some sense in relation to 'public places', but it really doesn't in relation to domestic dwellings (over which those doing the work have absolutely no control), does it?

 

[SUNRAY]

I think the people you've heard that from are probably being rather silly. For I start, I would expect something at the start of those regs to define what all the regs relate to but, even if it didn't, one surely has to take 'context' into account - I haven't looked for a long lime, but I imagine that, for example, the Highway Code often says "you must" or "you must not", without explaining that that only applied if one was driving or riding a vehicle

That may make make some sense in relation to 'public places', but it really doesn't in relation to domestic dwellings (over which those doing the work have absolutely no control), does it?

The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 doesn't only apply to commercial properties, it applies to all places where work is being performed. That means a risk assessment has to be made at every place of work and if that is a residential property... so be it.

 

[JohnW2]

The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 doesn't only apply to commercial properties, it applies to all places where work is being performed. That means a risk assessment has to be made at every place of work and if that is a residential property... so be it.

That's what we often see being discussed.

If those proposing/intending to do the work wish to (or have to) undertake a risk assessment, then that's fair enough but, in a domestic property, I'm not sure what they then do if their risk assessment is 'unfavourable' - just refuse to do the work?

I'm in no way familiar with the Act, but if presumably doesn't (couldn't), impose any 'requirements' on the owners of domestic properties, does it?

 

[ebee]

The bit where I said "Does/Does not" could well be incorrect so I apologise for my error (It was a quick version of what was explained to me by an assessor for a scheme some years back and I took it as correct at the time - not that I`ve never argued with an assessor on a point of what they have said, that particular assessor I was familar with for years and decided to take what he said as pretty much correct, my bad - I should have checked the substance of that one.)

The bit I said about the potential for any properpty to become a workplace I stand by in principle to some extent.
If you "employ" a person, a firm or some such to work in your home/your own priivate club/your charity/your garden shed where you keep your tools because you are a self employed electrician or a partnership then to me the general duty of care in all things (including electric).
I am not (yet) convinced that it would not be covered by the act if you contracted someone to do some work in your own home.

I remember a job where I was asked by a small plumbing heating firm (two man band) to wire in some controls for a boiler, in a loft type area with no flooring just the insulation on top of the plasterboard ceiling below, apparently the local gas board refused to service it because there was no safe walkway.
Between us we contrived a "safe walkway" on a temporary basis for us to do our works and advised the customer to contract a joiner etc to make a safer permanent addition fot future tasks, if he did not know a joiner we could suggest some trades we had worked with.
The customer asked that we left our temporay boards in place, we refused and explained that due to us being accustomed to working in such places with due dilligence we could not leave an "ordinary person" such as himself to face any risks from using it.

 

[JohnW2]

The bit I said about the potential for any properpty to become a workplace I stand by in principle to some extent.

Asa statement of fact, that's obviously a fact. However, in a good few walks of life, 'workplaces' are, by definition, inevitably very hazardous places, and that has to be accepted.

If you "employ" a person, a firm or some such to work in your home/your own priivate club/your charity/your garden shed where you keep your tools because you are a self employed electrician or a partnership then to me the general duty of care in all things (including electric).

I think there are 'general' laws which impose a duty of care in relation to anyone one allows to enter one's property, whether they be a workman, tradesperson, 'friend or family' etc.

I am not (yet) convinced that it would not be covered by the act if you contracted someone to do some work in your own home.

AsI implied before, I'm not sure what this really means (in relation to EAWR), since I can't see that EAWR can reasonably impose a requirement on all property owners to ensure that that there are no potential hazards in the property, just in case they might be encountered by someone who entered the property to undertake electrical work?

Kind Regards, John