PART P NON COMPLIANCE

[sparkytim]

Had a go at my LABC today thought you might like to see responsebad day explode

PART P.pdf

WDC REPLY.pdf

MY 1ST REPLY.pdf

 

[sellers]

On an average we receive over 200 Part Pnotifications every month from the various competent persons schemes running, so

the system is working.

Should be a politician!

It proves nothing!!

I average about 10 notified jobs a month. I doubt you have only 20 self employed sparks in your area!

 

[kme]

Agree with Sellers on the above point.

Accepted, it is difficult, if not impossible, for them; or indeed ANY LABC to "police" the system. That, in itself is the single biggest downfall of the whole system.

I understand, and appreciate the point you were making in this matter; however I would like to give my opinion on this "fine" system, and how it is (supposed to be?) implemented:

If an LABC becomes aware of notifiable works carried out, which have not been notified, they will, in the first instance, approach the property owner. If the owner fails to provide details of the "responsible person" (I use the term somewhat loosely), they can be liable to the fine. However, if the customer is as "appalled" as we usually are, they will happily supply the requested details. The person responsible for carrying out the works then becomes liable for the fine.

If this has actually ever happened yet remains a mystery. With Building Control whining about the lack of funds, you`d think they`d be getting off their backsides a bit more to swell the coffers.........

KME

 

[ADS]

Hi,

The only problem with your complaint, Sparkytim, is that you are channeling your anger at the wrong person.

The electrician doing the work is doing nothing wrong, as long as he is competent and installs, inspects and tests in compliance with BS7671 and the building regs.

He doesn't have to notify anybody about anything - so you're not going to see him getting done for anything..... unless something happens and he's proven incompetent.

And KME has it wrong - as your LABC pointed out in their reply:

As with all controlled work, the responsibility lies with the owner to notify and submit an application.

- so it is the house owner who is responsible for notifying all controlled works on their property to the LABC, not the person doing the work.

This isn't just electrical work - it's most building work.

The difference with electrical, obviously, is that they can use a registered spark and bypass the notification of their electrical works - and save some money.

The customers in your complaint are the ones who have broken the law.

It's a bit like them getting a builder in to build them an extension - but not submitting plans or a building notice - they break the law, not the builder.

 

[kme]

I apologise if my info was wrong - I was reiterating the info I was provided with by my LABC officer who was at a 17th ED seminar last year; when this very issue was raised. I believe I quoted verbatim what was said at that time; if it is incorrect then please ignore it.

KME

 

[ADS]

I apologise if my info was wrong - I was reiterating the info I was provided with by my LABC officer who was at a 17th ED seminar last year; when this very issue was raised. I believe I quoted verbatim what was said at that time; if it is incorrect then please ignore it.KME

Hi KME, I wasn't having a go, by the way - I've just noticed the lack of smilies in my post:Blushing

IMHO, the only way to clamp down on the 'cowboy' element is to increase public awareness.

I mean, using my example above, no-one in their right mind would get an extension built without submitting an application to the LABC - because they know that's what they have to do.

But the same people would get a re-wire done and not submit an application - why??, because they don't know you have to!

 

[androiduk2002]

Is it just about non-awareness or in these tough economic times is it joe public just looking for the cheepest option ?

I was in a taxi several weeks ago chatting to driver as you do he was taking me to college , he had with the help of "a qualified spark" rewired his house, as the conversation went on it turned out his "qualified spark" completed a course several years ago but is not in "the trade" hes another taxi driver headbang .

From what Ive read and listened to Part P just does not work and will not work, maybe it would be a better option to make sparks "Licienced" with I.D. cards and huge fines for people that use unlicienced sparks, but again you still have the problems of "people" looking to save a few pounds and risk their lives.

 

[Evans Electric]

Until that happens the problem will continue. I went to do a small job at a house last year , owner says " Its all been rewired , we had it done properly, the chap was a fireman"

Probably call a carpenter if they have a fire.

 

[Megaohm7]

Is it just about non-awareness or in these tough economic times is it joe public just looking for the cheepest option ?I was in a taxi several weeks ago chatting to driver as you do he was taking me to college , he had with the help of "a qualified spark" rewired his house, as the conversation went on it turned out his "qualified spark" completed a course several years ago but is not in "the trade" hes another taxi driver headbang .

From what Ive read and listened to Part P just does not work and will not work, maybe it would be a better option to make sparks "Licienced" with I.D. cards and huge fines for people that use unlicienced sparks, but again you still have the problems of "people" looking to save a few pounds and risk their lives.

You would think a licencing system would help this problem . I was in a well known DIY store yesterday with the wife and noticed they were doing a special on Wylex dual rcd c/u's . A man was taking a close look at one of these whilst in discussion with a member of staff . As we all know fitting a c/u is notifiable . How many people will do this and will the installation itself be tested and certified ? I wouldn't mind betting that the man in question was going to do none of these .. It makes a mockery of the whole thing .

 

[sparkytim]

Hi,The only problem with your complaint, Sparkytim, is that you are channeling your anger at the wrong person.

The electrician doing the work is doing nothing wrong, as long as he is competent and installs, inspects and tests in compliance with BS7671 and the building regs.

He doesn't have to notify anybody about anything - so you're not going to see him getting done for anything..... unless something happens and he's proven incompetent.

And KME has it wrong - as your LABC pointed out in their reply:

As with all controlled work, the responsibility lies with the owner to notify and submit an application.

- so it is the house owner who is responsible for notifying all controlled works on their property to the LABC, not the person doing the work.

This isn't just electrical work - it's most building work.

The difference with electrical, obviously, is that they can use a registered spark and bypass the notification of their electrical works - and save some money.

The customers in your complaint are the ones who have broken the law.

It's a bit like them getting a builder in to build them an extension - but not submitting plans or a building notice - they break the law, not the builder.

Hi thanks for your input

If You read my complaint again you will see I am aware that it is the Owner who in the eyes of the law is responsible, hence their not wanting to be identified.

We as contractors must be responsible to be aware of the legislation related to our work, and as such have a duty to inform all affected parties involved.

Hence my anger is directed to the right person. The home owner was totally un-aware of Part P, how would they know, my first point, LACK OF PUBLICITY.

The contractor concerned does bring into question his competency by issueing fraudulent certificates and doing work non compliant with BS7671

I will be putting it right and the customer is willing to pay AGAIN for work they were under the impression was ok.

Cost of the work is not an issue with them, they should have had him back to put it right but then they would be at fault in the eyes of the Law.

 

[ProDave]

failure to comply could lead to a householder being required to bring the work up to standard and may make it more difficult to sell there homes

Well there you have it. There really IS no penalty for failing to notify a Part P job is there. The prospect of perhaps having to "bring it up to standard" will really have people quaking in their boots.

Oh how I'm glad Part P never made it to Scotland and I don't have to deal with this nonsense on a daily basis.

I will get flamed for this, but if I ever go back to England, I think I would just ignore Part P as completely irrelevant to anything other than a new build or extension (i.e irrelevant to anything that does not need building control for other reasons) as indeed I did on the one and only job I have done in England recently, a CU change for a relative last year.

 

[ianmacd]

I will be putting it right and the customer is willing to pay AGAIN for work they were under the impression was ok.

Why pay again? If they contact LABC and tell them whats wrong they most likely will accept an EIC with the I&T section only signed and then issue a competion cert (with the appropriate fee). They may even take the matter of your lone ranger mate more seriously if the home owner has given them the details.

I will get flamed for this, ......

And so you should as thats a stupid and immature comment. I would fully support LABC bringing any case against any sparks that did this. We have enough trouble with cowboys already and do not need real sparks turning to the dark side.

 

[sparkytim]

Why pay again? If they contact LABC and tell them whats wrong they most likely will accept an EIC with the I&T section only signed and then issue a competion cert (with the appropriate fee). They may even take the matter of your lone ranger mate more seriously if the home owner has given them the details.Would you invite back a non compliant non competent person to have another go at it?

I don't think so

 

[PBC_1966]

Frankly, the less that the arrogant little dictators that now infest local councils poke their noses into people doing work (or having work done) in their own homes, the better.

Yes, there are plenty of homeowners who have not yet heard of Part P. One of the things which bugs me so much about the oft-quoted "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" line is that there are thousands of new laws being passed every year, regulating the most petty details of our lives now. Even if you spent all day, every day reading them, you'd never keep up. So how is the average person even supposed to know about all these rules?

But even for those who do know about Part P, they - quite correctly - see the LABC fees as extortionate, and coupled with the fact that just about every brush with a local authority these days leaves a nasty taste in the mouth because of their increasingly aggressive and confrontational attitude to everything means that many people will assess the chances of minor (especially internal-only) works coming to their LABC's attention as being about nil and thus just not get the bureaucrats involved.

If somebody is charging for shoddy workmanship, that was already covered under various trading standards laws. Part P was not and never will be the solution to that.

 

[ianmacd]

Would you invite back a non compliant non competent person to have another go at it?I don't think so

I never said anything about getting your mate back. They should contact LABC.

 

[Nicky Tesla]

If i am completely competent when i install a DB in the hours that i am employed by my part P employer, then why would i suddenly become incompetent, when fitting a DB after work as a private job. :C

 

[sparkytim]

I never said anything about getting your mate back. They should contact LABC.

And thats what LABC would do invite him back to put it right and owner would have to pay LABC to inspect and issue complience cert.

They have decided to cut their losses and start a fresh with a Registered contractor who can self certify.

As he had only charged

 

[Nicky Tesla]

So lets get this right.

Legally there is no problem with me doing any electrical work, as long as i do it competently.

The only ones who may incur a fine is the house holder.

Thats a green light to me then:Applaud

 

[sparkytim]

If i am completely competent when i install a DB in the hours that i am employed by my part P employer, then why would i suddenly become incompetent, when fitting a DB after work as a private job. :C

Hope your employer is not on the ForumROTFWL

No one suggests that competence is lacking in that situation but do you get the owner to notify?

 

[ianmacd]

No one said you were but without being a member of a little club you are breaking the law. You would need to contact LABC first.