Did you actually read ALL of my post and did you actually digest any of it before you responded.
Yes and yes.
Why are you so insistent that the gospels according to NAPIT and / or the NICEIC is law'
Please show where I've even suggested that I am.
There is no substitute for proper qualifications, the appropriate skill set and EXPERIENCE when it comes down to making the decision at the coalface for what coding is needed for a non compliance with BS7671. If you are not able to do that then IMO you should not be doing EICR's,
That's all true, but you were arguing against the use of best practice guides issued by officially recognised organisers of competent person schemes, saying that non-conformances should only be judged against the wiring regs, so it seemed reasonable to consider the fact that those contain effectively nothing in the way of guidance on codings.
Perhaps if you'd said at the outset that the substitute for scheme BPGs is proper qualifications, the appropriate skill set and experience, not BS 7671?
However, you are ignoring the fact that virtually every industry and profession has defined best practices, and the fact that as soon as it's made legally mandatory for non-conformances to be rectified, and made a criminal offence to fail to do so, we really should strive to have a system where non-conformances are coded consistently, day in, day out, from one end of the country to another.
If you think about it, BS 7671 is nothing but a large best practice guide for how electrical installations shall be designed and constructed, and I don't see people saying that we shouldn't have it, that we should just rely on people who carry out design and construction etc having proper qualifications, the appropriate skill set and experience.
There is much that is unsatisfactory about the present situation, such as different BPGs giving different guidance, but there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the idea of having them