Guest av1 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 2 minutes ago, snowychap said: Indeed. So membership of that body provides at least some reassurance that the person carrying the work out ought to be prefessionally competent enough to do the work? I theory yes. The only slight issue is that for anyone that employs people, you would have the one registered supervisor (so the boss, or someone that he/she has employed for that role). It doesn't necessarily mean that the people they send to do the job know what their doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 2 minutes ago, snowychap said: And your friend never does this? Yes he provides a full installation certificate evert time one is required. All he doesn't do is register the work with building control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 Just now, av1 said: I theory yes. The only slight issue is that for anyone that employs people, you would have the one registered supervisor (so the boss, or someone that he/she has employed for that role). It doesn't necessarily mean that the people they send to do the job know what their doing. This would be an argument for more and more rigorous regulation, wouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 1 minute ago, snowychap said: This would be an argument for more and more rigorous regulation, wouldn't it? I agree. As i said in my op, this sort of thing is needed, we all want to see cowboys weeded out, and i think 99% of good tradesman would agree. But the current system system simply doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, av1 said: Yes he provides a full installation certificate evert time one is required. All he doesn't do is register the work with building control. So he isn't complying with the law? Do the people he does the work for know this? Does he reduce the price accordingly (given what you;ve already said about the incidence of membership fees, i.e. that they fall on the customer)? Does he perhaps think that doing this (and presumably telling the people not to worry about building control and that it's all bollocks) likely assists the actual cowbay traders because people don't think that it's worth the bother or cost of compliance? 1 minute ago, av1 said: But the current system system simply doesn't work. One of the reasons it doesn't might well be with people above who think that they're better than the rules, regulations and laws that apply to others in their trade. Edited August 30, 2018 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 1 minute ago, snowychap said: So he isn't complying with the law? No. But then can you not understand his point? Someone with no electrical experience can rewire someones house and comply with the law providing they pay a fee of £450, and this work is never checked for safety. You may disagree with it, but certainly you must see how this irritates people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 i think if you was a sparkie trying to work on one of my site you would need - company (to get registered on our supply chain) - constructionline, CHAS, ISO 9001 quality management guys on site - at least 1 SMSTS black hat, 1 first aider, everyone on site CSCS, NICEIC, asbestos awareness, face fit mask, any access equipment in the RAMS (towers, MEWPS etc) and thats just what i can think of off the top of my head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 (edited) This is from the IET They aren't even trying to resolve the issue, they are just using it as a money making exercise. Quote Part P will apply to all electrical work in dwellings, whether carried out by professionals or DIYers. Some DIY work will require the submission of a building notice to the local authority and the payment of a building control fee. Edited August 30, 2018 by av1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 1 minute ago, av1 said: No. But then can you not understand his point? Someone with no electrical experience can rewire someones house and comply with the law providing they pay a fee of £450, and this work is never checked for safety. You may disagree with it, but certainly you must see how this irritates people? They comply with the part of the law which is concerned with notifying the authority where work carried out is notifiable. They may not necessarily comply with the law in terms of competence unless they are competent to carry the work out. Can you and your friend not understand this? If he refuses to notify the relevant authorities of notifiable works then I'm not sure it matters how competently he carries the works out in terms of him not complying with the requirement to notify notifiable works. How does a member of the public distinguish between him, a competent electirician who refuses to comply with notification requirements because he won't pay annual subs to be a registered competent person, and someone else who is not a competent electrician and who isn't a registered competent person? Again, does he tell the people for whom he does the work that he isn't, and doesn't intent to, comply with notification requirements? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, av1 said: This is from the IET Are you saying that part P shouldn't apply to people who carry out work in their own homes? Or that people shouldn't be able to carry out work in their own homes unless they are registered competent people who comply with all of the relevant legislation? Edited August 30, 2018 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 26 minutes ago, snowychap said: Are you saying that part P shouldn't apply to people who carry out work in their own homes? Or that people shouldn't be able to carry out work in their own homes unless they are registered competent people who comply with all of the relevant legislation? I believe having the correct qualifications to do the job are more important than simply notifying that job to building control. If that work was then assessed for safety, i wouldn't have an issue at all. The trouble is, it isn't. So when someone buys their next house, the rewire may very well have been logged, but it could very well have been carried out by a DIY enthusiast. Surely that can't be right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 37 minutes ago, snowychap said: They comply with the part of the law which is concerned with notifying the authority where work carried out is notifiable. They may not necessarily comply with the law in terms of competence unless they are competent to carry the work out. Can you and your friend not understand this? If he refuses to notify the relevant authorities of notifiable works then I'm not sure it matters how competently he carries the works out in terms of him not complying with the requirement to notify notifiable works. Just to clarify my as per my OP. When i was self employed i registered for annual membership, and when i carry out the job for my friend next week the job will be logged with Building control. I'm not in any way saying that current regulations shouldn't be followed, I'm following them. All I'm saying is that i believe the current regulations aren't fit for purpose. As have been discussed over the last few pages, they accept work (without verification) from people that aren't qualified (when the whole aim of the thing was to ensure safety) whislt making it difficult for good tradesman that work PAYE so can't justify the cost given they may only do the odd foreigner. I'm in favour of anything thats rids my trade of people that aren't qualified to carry out the work. Sadly this hasn't worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 3 minutes ago, av1 said: I believe having the correct qualifications to do the job are more important than simply notifying that job to building control. It's not an either or. The person carrying out the work needs (in order to comply with the law) to be a competent person (as per your previous post). I don't think either you or I are disputing that. Also, in order to comply with the law, notifiable works need to be certified (and I believe there are three procedures for that). Quote If that work was then assessed for safety, i wouldn't have an issue at all. The trouble is, it isn't. If the building control body are not complying with their part in the regulations then they are not complying and should be brought to book. At the heart of your initial complaint is an implication that the process is nothing more than registration. It may well be the case with your building control body but it would seem that if this is so then they themselves are failing to comply because they need to (according to this Quote ...determine the extent of inspection and testing needed for it to establish that the work is safe, based on the nature of the electrical work and the competence of the installer If your argmuent is simply that this building control body are failing in their part (if indeed they don't follow the process) then I'd agree (with the proviso that they don't do anything other than issue a certificate/register the work). 16 minutes ago, av1 said: So when someone buys their next house, the rewire may very well have been logged, but it could very well have been carried out by a DIY enthusiast. Surely that can't be right? Again, it's back to competence. If the work is competently done and it has gone through the proper procedure required for notifiable work (so not just phoning up building control, paying a fee and nothing more happening) then I don't see it as a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 14 minutes ago, av1 said: they accept work (without verification) As above, that's a problem. Are you sure that they do that, though? You may have inferred that as you may not have asked more about the second option (i.e. the £450 plus vat one) as you know it wouldn't apply to you because you'd be able to prove that you have the qualifications that would allow them to determine that you are sufficiently competent that your work would not require a higher level of inspection and testing that the work of someone without those qualifications might require (though other things may be taken in to account, I suppose). If they are not doing anything more in their procedures for option two as opposed to option one other than charging a higher rate then it would appear that they were not complying with the regulations. 18 minutes ago, av1 said: As have been discussed over the last few pages You also included the bit about your friend who refuses to comply with the regulations. If neither he nor the building control body are complying with the regulations then both are failing to comply with the regulations. That one doesn't, doesn't justify another also failing to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 6 minutes ago, snowychap said: If the work is competently done and it has gone through the proper procedure required for notifiable work (so not just phoning up building control, paying a fee and nothing more happening) then I don't see it as a problem. 100%. I think we both agree, we seem to be simply looking at it from different angles. It is nothing more than paying a fee and submitting an online notification of works. That's my issue. The system doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 2 minutes ago, snowychap said: As above, that's a problem. Are you sure that they do that, though? Yes I'm 100% sure about that. The gentleman i spoke to was tbe unauthorised Electrician at building control and we spent about 5mins discusing it. Even he thinks its absolutely absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 30, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 30, 2018 1 hour ago, lapal_fan said: he said there were 3 routes into accountancy Yes, that's right. Route A and route B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 8 minutes ago, snowychap said: You also included the bit about your friend who refuses to comply with the regulations. If neither he nor the building control body are complying with the regulations then both are failing to comply with the regulations. That one doesn't, doesn't justify another also failing to do so. I also mentioned the fact that my job next week will be notified, so I'm not saying i agree him. Only that i understand his reasoning to an extent given the absurdity of the current system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 16 minutes ago, av1 said: 100%. I think we both agree, we seem to be simply looking at it from different angles. Oh, indeed. I think we're agreeing on the main thrust of things (i.e. how it should work - competent people doing properly tested and inspected work so that it's all safe). Quote It is nothing more than paying a fee and submitting an online notification of works. That's my issue. The system doesn't work. That's not a failing with the system. it's a failing with a participant in the system. If, however, the system relies upon building control bodies to contol building control bodies (which it may do) then that is a failing with the system. 23 minutes ago, av1 said: Yes I'm 100% sure about that. The gentleman i spoke to was tbe unauthorised Electrician at building control and we spent about 5mins discusing it. Even he thinks its absolutely absurd. It's not just absurd. I'd like to see him justify this in terms of compliance with the regulations. If he can't, he shouldn't do it. 16 minutes ago, av1 said: I also mentioned the fact that my job next week will be notified, so I'm not saying i agree him. Only that i understand his reasoning to an extent given the absurdity of the current system. Sure. I hope I didn't give the impression that I was questioning your willingness to comply with the regulations. I wasn't meaning to and would like to make that clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 30, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 30, 2018 Probably about 12 years ago, I stripped out the kitchen, fitted new worktops and cupboards, sink, hob, cooker hood etc. and so I had to add a spur onto the ring main for the cooker hood fan. Because of the regs about getting a certificate, I had to pay a qualified lecky £125 quid to basically look at it, and sign a certificate. It didn't seem overly good vfm. (without wishing to big myself up, I am a competent person - member of the IET, chartered engineer etc.). So I guess there will be plenty of registered leckies getting £125+ for 5 minutes "work" (plus a 10 minute journey, to be fair). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts