Has any one seen any official figures for the frequency of electrically-caused accidents (fires, fatalities, etc.) covering the periods before and after the introduction of Part P? Is there any trend evident? Is any distinction made between fixed wiring and connected appliances as the cause?
How effective is Part P?
- Thread starter Sparkless
- Start date
Help Support Talk Electrician Forum:
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2009
- Messages
- 14,816
- Reaction score
- 993
If you can't find before and after, try something comparing Scotland to England after part P came in.
I think it would be difficult to quantify the effect Part P has had when 3 years after it's introduction the publication of BS 7671:2008 happened and will possibly have had more effect on the stats with the increased use of RCD's
Although the LFB fire stats in 2015 peaked at a recorded 258 consumer unit fires while the rest of the country ISTR was significantly lower with a total of 8 consumer unit fires so I don't know if Part P has done that much
The increased use of RCDs may have had some impact but as BS7671 isn't retrospective only newer installations and rewires will have them, leaving the earlier ones (the majority?) without, so the effect on the figures may be small.
It's only my opinion, but the birth of modular consumer units, building up your own CU has got to have increased the risks of 
. Have seen some shocking loose connections on bus bar to MCB and main DP switch
. Have seen some shocking loose connections on bus bar to MCB and main DP switchI agree yeah, and will add that during 2000-2020 we had a whole load of shockingly bad consumer units made of flimsy plastic, Hager, MK senrty, Doepke to name a few that were almost impossible to fit the lid back on them inside 2 minutes. now we have decent metal boxes with built in tails clamps and cheap RCBO's thats all sorted, so much easier to install (even for an amatuer), I think that alone will be more responsible for much fewer consumer unit fires compared to any legislation change (part P)It's only my opinion, but the birth of modular consumer units, building up your own CU has got to have increased the risks of
and to the OP, I've never come across any official figures but ever if there were some, they should be taken with a pinch of salt anyway, statistics can be presented in many ways and it's normally in the favour of the person who presents said statistics
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2010
- Messages
- 14,620
- Reaction score
- 1,170
Part P? Money spinner I only have to look at my part p notification receipt to see how much money is going to the CPS providers for basically naff all effort
It would be hard to make any direct comparisons, with a large number of immigrants working in the trades, especially in London, it would be like comparing apples and pears. We would have been better off with a scheme along the lines for the French. No one can ply a trade without demonstrating proper training. Not that even that would stop some of the cowboys.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2008
- Messages
- 14,589
- Reaction score
- 1,256
Back in Dec 2018 there was an article in PE which pretty much concluded that Part-P has achieved bu*9er all!!
https://professional-electrician.com/features/part-p-what-more-can-be-done/
There are other documents called impact assessments, from the Gov.UK website
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/building-regulations-impact-assessments
Such as this one from 2012
https://assets.publishing.service.g...b/121217_-_Part_P_IA_-_to_publish_for_web.pdf
But I can't be bothered to actually read much of it to see if they contain any useful statistics!!
I am guessing the only accurate statistics are the number of Competent Person Scheme Providers... The number of members they each have... The number of notified Part P jobs which are submitted each year... The total revenue generated from CPS membership and Part-P job notifications.. Plus the number of prosecutions for miss-use of a CPS logo on trading documents / advertising etc.. by a non-CPS member!!!
As for Fires, Shock, Injury, Death... That's like trying to guess the number of mates from work, or down the pub, who can do your electrics, for a modest cash amount, over the weekend, as they still have to work 9 to 5, doing their Day-Job!!!
I agree about modular consumer units .The fact that you require a torque screwdriver ,so not to over tighten connections tells you every thing about the components that are being manufactured . Cheaper & cheaper products . Copper comb busbars can create bad connection , due tightening blind. So i invested in inspection mirror to make sure i've not missed copper busbar comb at bottom of Mcb's etc .It's only my opinion, but the birth of modular consumer units, building up your own CU has got to have increased the risks of
Last edited:
I used to have a dental mirror, which disappeared some while ago, so just use phone cam now.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2013
- Messages
- 1,600
- Reaction score
- 346
Plastic dental mirror Click here
Plastic dental mirror with light Click here
Metal dental mirror Click here
Each one is less than £5.00
Plastic dental mirror with light Click here
Metal dental mirror Click here
Each one is less than £5.00
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2009
- Messages
- 14,816
- Reaction score
- 993
But even worse than that, a simple change of design to the cage clamp blocks off the "wrong" side making it impossible to insert the busbar outside the cage clamp. But not many manufacturers do that. Why not? It is so cheap and simple once you see one. That is the sort of thing that should be mandatory and written into the BS specs for busbar components.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
