Being registered.............

[HappyHippyDad]

Just thinking aloud.

Retirement is a long way off, but when it does happen I may well carry on doing smaller jobs once or twice a week. I don't think I would stay registered, but I may end up doing the odd CU change, or lets say I was even on a job where a building inspector was involved.

Now, I could still issue a certificate. All the building inspector wants is the certificate, then he/she signs the job off. With a CU change I could still issue a certificate, thus when the customer sells their house they have the required paperwork and will not find themselves in trouble.

Apart from this being morally wrong and also breaking the BS7671 rules, is there anyway the customer could find themselves out of pocket or having problems (as they will have a certificate)? Who actually checks to see if the job has been notified, what is it used for?

I must add that I am fully registered and do everything by the book. Just having a lazy Sunday and thinking to the distant future, when I may not even do enough notifiable jobs to be allowed to stay registered.

 

[westward10]

Think about something else plus it is Saturday.

 

[Dustydazzler]

Gas Fitters will have the same issue when they drop out of GasSafe ?

The gas fitter that changed my parents boiler a few years ago (old family friend is his 70s) issued a sum total of 0 paperwork

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Think about something else plus it is Saturday.

One day off isn't too bad

Yep, I've moved on from my retirement thoughts now. Mowing the lawn and cleaning the house. Christ, this is turning into one of those really boring facebook pages where you detail your life rather than live it!!

 

[telectrix]

me now retired, 75, not cps member now. if i want to do a CU change, i will complete an EIC, all accurate. as for notification, sod it. one life... live long and prosper.

 

[OnlQQker]

One day off isn't too bad

Yep, I've moved on from my retirement thoughts now. Mowing the lawn and cleaning the house. Christ, this is turning into one of those really boring facebook pages where you detail your life rather than live it!!

This is my idea of cleaning the house!

 

[pirate]

Retired as I am, I have constant calls on my time for small jobs.
HHD, you will always be busy, but also free to turn down stuff too.
My diary is full with fitting smokes to the new Scottish regs, and it's boring AF...especially with the poor supply chain, and I have stopped taking new orders now for that reason.
Yesterday I took out a poorly fitted light fitting in a wardrobe, replaced it, got 2 bottles of a decent Rioja for my trouble...so £20 worth for 20 minutes' worth of time, and it was my next-door neighbour so no travelling or lugging tools. I appreciate retirement is a while away, but don't fear it, just embrace it!
As @telectrix said..."one life"!

 

[Dustydazzler]

My dad retired around 2015 after spending 50 years in the trade , turned 80 last year and his happier than ever,]
No stress , no part pee , no scam fees or site inspections , no travelling to and from London

He has more money than he could spend in the next 50 years so literally now does what he wants when he wants to

 

[Midwest]

Retired from a Scheme some 4 years ago now. Did some alterations in my house, which included adding one CU & altering another.

Before I started, and as the building refurb was under a Building Notice, I spoke with my BC. I could document my qualifications, and could provide my last Scheme assessment to carry out the electrical work myself & provide certification. Just needed signing off in the Completion Certificate.

My BC started off quite happy to accept this, however when push came to shove they wanted me to provide an EICR for the new work. I did try one third party installer, but they weren't interested. In the end I got someone in to do the work and sign it off. Crazy, but say la vie.

Before I retired, I had quite a few customers requesting copies of EIC's, Minor Works, and how they could get copies of compliance certificates, all for house sales.

@HappyHippyDad, I'd think of a different retirement plan.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Retired from a Scheme some 4 years ago now. Did some alterations in my house, which included adding one CU & altering another.

Before I started, and as the building refurb was under a Building Notice, I spoke with my BC. I could document my qualifications, and could provide my last Scheme assessment to carry out the electrical work myself & provide certification. Just needed signing off in the Completion Certificate.

My BC started off quite happy to accept this, however when push came to shove they wanted me to provide an EICR for the new work. I did try one third party installer, but they weren't interested. In the end I got someone in to do the work and sign it off. Crazy, but say la vie.

Before I retired, I had quite a few customers requesting copies of EIC's, Minor Works, and how they could get copies of compliance certificates, all for house sales.

@HappyHippyDad, I'd think of a different retirement plan.

This was my original point. Building control would be the one signing off the job at your property and all they would have wanted is to have a completed EIC. They would then sign off the work.

Of course, you could have just completed an EICR?

It does push you towards the @telectrix way of doing it though doesn't it. Just do the CU change (correctly and safely), issue EIC and move on, bypassing building control.

 

[Midwest]

This was my original point. Building control would be the one signing off the job at your property and all they would have wanted is to have a completed EIC. They would then sign off the work.

Of course, you could have just completed an EICR?

It does push you towards the @telectrix way of doing it though doesn't it. Just do the CU change (correctly and safely), issue EIC and move on, bypassing building control.

I think your find that very few BC's have the wherewithal to sign off electrical work; they don't want the responsivity.

And its all well & good doing some notifiable work, then leaving the owner of the property to sort out compliance. I don't think thats right personally.

 

[7029 dave]

IMO there are two very different situations, doing payed work for Joe public and doing your own work in your own property.
Some would do the work regardless of being in a CPS. I might be a bit twitchy at the first, but not the second.

 

[LukeD]

There is a huge black market for paperwork at the moment .House sellers playing "catch up"

 

[Dustydazzler]

when we purchased out current 3 bed-semi 6 years ago , there was no paperwork for the single storey rear extension

£65 for an indem policy at the advice of the solicitor and job done

 

[partplonker]

I think your find that very few BC's have the wherewithal to sign off electrical work; they don't want the responsivity.

That's been my experience with my local BC. They told me to just get an EICR from a registered spark when I asked what it would cost to have them inspect my work.

I'm not registered and most of the electrical work I do is maintenance on one big installation, the majority of which is not notifiable. When I do the odd job for friends and family like board changes or other notifiable domestic work, I still do all the initial verification/testing and prepare an EIC before getting a CPS registered spark that I know in to do me an EICR for BC.

 

[Dustydazzler]

I had around 12 - 18 years when I didn't bother to re new my CPS scam membership , and during this time I did a couple notifiable jobs. My local BC was happy to accept an EICR in order to comply.
Not strictly correct but my local inspector seemed happy with an EICR,

 

[HappyHippyDad]

I guess my original question was ... How can the homeowner get in trouble if they have the correct certificates?

They come to sell the house and have all the required EIC's and MEIWC's. That is what will be asked for. How can they get into trouble? The work will not have been notified, but they have the certificates. I cant imagine any solicitor is contacting the building authorities at the time of sale to cross match all the certificates given to make sure the work was notified.

I have no intention of doing this at the moment or for the foreseeable future. Even when I retire i doubt I doubt I shall ever be in that situation. it just popped into mind and I thought i'd ask.

 

[Dustydazzler]

Any missing paperwork , warranties and certificates like Fensa or GasSafe and the buyer will be required to purchase an indemnity policy to cover for the missing paperwork from the solicitors

Had this on 3 occasions when we have purchased houses

A homeowner / seller would get into Zero 'trouble' for either losing the paperwork or not having it in the first place

The only time a homeowner may get into trouble 'after the fact' is if an extension was built with no planning permission

 

[brianmoooore]

The only time a homeowner may get into trouble 'after the fact' is if an extension was built with no planning permission

And not then, if it's been 'substantially finished' for four years or more.

 

[Midwest]

I guess my original question was ... How can the homeowner get in trouble if they have the correct certificates?

They come to sell the house and have all the required EIC's and MEIWC's. That is what will be asked for. How can they get into trouble? The work will not have been notified, but they have the certificates. I cant imagine any solicitor is contacting the building authorities at the time of sale to cross match all the certificates given to make sure the work was notified.

I have no intention of doing this at the moment or for the foreseeable future. Even when I retire i doubt I doubt I shall ever be in that situation. it just popped into mind and I thought i'd ask.

The home owner has the ultimate responsibility that Building Regs are complied with, not the contractor.

We sold our house in 2018. There's a signed legal document, which amongst other things, asks if you've had any electrical work carried out on the property since 2005. If so it asks you to provide certification, which includes compliance certificate if applicable. The home owner can of course lie, but it is a signed legal document.

If notification is not carried out, thats none compliance with Building Regs, which may put off prospective buyers, it might not. As some said, you can buy Indemnity Insurance in such cases. However, Indemnity Insurance, only covers you from legal action from a Building Control, it doesn't actually cover you from putting things right. There is a time limit on prosecution by BC, I believe.

Building Regs are Statutory, and can result in a criminal prosecution, if they are not complied with. Are there many public cases of BC taking people to Court for non compliance with Part P? I've not heard of any. But it is the law, any with anything such as, break it and you have to face the consequences. As said, not a good business model.

 

[partplonker]

Building Regs are Statutory, and can result in a criminal prosecution, if they are not complied with. Are there many public cases of BC taking people to Court for non compliance with Part P?

Googling around, I can only find the odd isolated case here and there where bathroom fitters and builders have been prosecuted, but really not very many considering the legislation is 17 years old.

I did find a stat that said between 2011 and 2013, 72% of English local authorities didn't even attempt to prosecute anyone for non-compliance under Part P and there was only 1 successful prosecution in the whole country. Presumably due to the cost and time involved in prosecuting people. https://www.napit.org.uk/pdf/NAPIT-Campaigns-Infographic-Building-Regulations-Enforcement-Part-P.pdf

It would seem like compliance with Part P is barely enforced. In the cases I did find, it was noted each time how substandard the work was and there were multiple counts of non-compliance for each defendant. So the people who got prosecuted were doing a lot of both non-compliant and dangerous work.

My takeaway is that if you don't do crap work and you don't do much of it, you can probably get away with it! (not that you should of course)

 

[pc1966]

So the people who got prosecuted were doing a lot of both non-compliant and dangerous work.

My takeaway is that if you don't do crap work and you don't do much of it, you can probably get away with it! (not that you should of course)

That kind of covers what is wrong with the whole "Part P" aspect, but also to some small degree that is is working. Sort of!

 

[brianmoooore]

Building Regs are Statutory, and can result in a criminal prosecution, if they are not complied with.

Quite correct,, but failing to apply for planning permission is not an offence.
As long as work is done in full compliance with the building regs, very little is going to happen, especially if four years have passed.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

The home owner has the ultimate responsibility that Building Regs are complied with, not the contractor.

We sold our house in 2018. There's a signed legal document, which amongst other things, asks if you've had any electrical work carried out on the property since 2005. If so it asks you to provide certification, which includes compliance certificate if applicable. The home owner can of course lie, but it is a signed legal document.

If notification is not carried out, thats none compliance with Building Regs, which may put off prospective buyers, it might not. As some said, you can buy Indemnity Insurance in such cases. However, Indemnity Insurance, only covers you from legal action from a Building Control, it doesn't actually cover you from putting things right. There is a time limit on prosecution by BC, I believe.

Building Regs are Statutory, and can result in a criminal prosecution, if they are not complied with. Are there many public cases of BC taking people to Court for non compliance with Part P? I've not heard of any. But it is the law, any with anything such as, break it and you have to face the consequences. As said, not a good business model.

That, is an interesting and informative reply. Thanks Midwest.

 

[partplonker]

That kind of covers what is wrong with the whole "Part P" aspect, but also to some small degree that is is working. Sort of!

I suppose so. I would add that in all cases, the punishment received was a fine of between £3k and £8k depending on how egregious the offence.

The only person I've ever heard of going to prison for dodgy electrical work was that bloke who installed lighting outside his pub and killed a young child (and obviously it was commercial so not Part P anyway). David Savery did a video about it. If I remember right, the lights weren't earthed properly, there was a fault leading them to be live and they were within reach of metal railings and the circuit was fed from an old Wylex fuseboard with no RCD. Besides all that, the pub was a complete deathtrap and this guy had bypassed the meter to put a cherry on top.

 

[Midwest]

Quite correct,, but failing to apply for planning permission is not an offence.
As long as work is done in full compliance with the building regs, very little is going to happen, especially if four years have passed.

I would suggest that failing to comply with Part P (notification etc), is not failing to apply for planning permission. Therefore it would be a criminal offence. Happy to be corrected on that point.

 

[Dustydazzler]

I would suggest that failing to comply with Part P (notification etc), is not failing to apply for planning permission. Therefore it would be a criminal offence. Happy to be corrected on that point.

Boris Johnson and the Conservative Party now call THIS a Wine and Cheese Board Party

 

[LukeD]

I would suggest that failing to comply with Part P (notification etc), is not failing to apply for planning permission. Therefore it would be a criminal offence. Happy to be corrected on that point.

It seems very little is a Criminal offence these days ...no one is Policing the trades.The councils dont want to know . the gas safe people useless . Even British gas dont want to get involved with cowboys fitting boilers. They just turn up and turn the gas off. No follow up from anyone

 

[Midwest]

Boris Johnson and the Conservative Party now call THIS a Wine and Cheese Board Party

You’ve a point there.

 

[nicebutdim]

You’ve a point there.

Asides from being entirely irrelevant to the thread, he actually doesn't.