Fixed Appliances--Again-No doubt

[Marnik]

At the moment you don't have to be "Qualified" to do an EICR either, you only have to be "Competent"
Unfortunately in this industry of ours, they yet have to define who or what are qualified or competent??

 

[sparkie_Al]

I am in exactly the same position as "oldtimer". I have been asked to do PAT testing by a lettings agent, and I have spent out on a tester, and becuse I have been registered with NIC for a long time, I know they would want you to get the qualification that comes with it, just to cover them, and you.
Hopefully I will get my investmant back, within a year.
They will not stop the non-electrician, doing PAT testing, as a Definition of competant has been issued, in 7671, if nowhere else, and if this definition is met they are there.
I also think that if the fixed wired system is protected correctly, problems with ANY appliance should not arise, HH, S or otherwise.

 

[sparkie_Al]

Competancy is defined. Also every year you should have to prove you ability and understanding to an assessor from within the scheme organisation you are registered or approved by.

 

[Marnik]

[Competancy is defined. Also every year you should have to prove you ability and understanding to an assessor from within the scheme organisation you are registered or approved by.]

And who exactly do you think is going to do that? NIC - NAPIT - Elecsa are not interested in PAT (read previous ) Unless the scam providers are getting of their backsides and actually doing something pro-active, then nothing is going to change; ie; YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE QUALIFIED TO DO PAT TESTING OR INDEED IECR TESTING , You only have to be "COMPETENT" what ever that means???????

 

[Silly Sausage]

[Competancy is defined. Also every year you should have to prove you ability and understanding to an assessor from within the scheme organisation you are registered or approved by.]

And who exactly do you think is going to do that? NIC - NAPIT - Elecsa are not interested in PAT (read previous ) Unless the scam providers are getting of their backsides and actually doing something pro-active, then nothing is going to change; ie; YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE QUALIFIED TO DO PAT TESTING OR INDEED IECR TESTING , You only have to be "COMPETENT" what ever that means???????

Considering how notoriously difficult it is to gain 2391, maybe having that should be a minimum for doing I&T?

 

[Marnik]

Archy, you hit it bang on right! Only 2391 qualified people should assess , inspect and test appliances and installations!
No doubt some other forum members have different views on this. Tin Hat on

 

[Silly Sausage]

No doubt some other forum members have different views on this. Tin Hat on

Sod them!

I'd get more work if it was made a min req.

 

[Marnik]

Agree Archy

 

[UNG]

Competancy is defined. Also every year you should have to prove you ability and understanding to an assessor from within the scheme organisation you are registered or approved by.

Who assesses the assessors competency to carry out the assessment

 

[Adam W]

Who assesses the assessors competency to carry out the assessment

That would need to be assessed on a case by case basis.

 

[cbw]

That old chestnut!!!!!

I once made myself very popular on a Paramedic training course by reminding the pompous assesor that you needed a degree to teach 5 year olds and what qualifications did he have??????

Didnt go down too well!!!!!

 

[cbw]

I actually remember all those years ago, he said "And thats why you will never be better than average"

My relpy was "At least I am not a below average burned out instructor"

Cant believe I passed!!!!!!

 

[UNG]

With instructors I often wonder who trained them and who trained the instructors instructor

I made myself popular with the instructor on a rope access course who said he was sitting on a standards committee and that they where looking at banning the use of tied knots in ropes in favour of preformed stitched eyes in the ropes having pointed out to him that this would preclude the use of rope diversions and they wanted the rules changing as they could not teach people to tie knots proficiently and they would make more money on the sale of rope as any damage near the end of the rope would render it scrap as the cost to get a new eye formed in the rope would be expensive, I concluded by suggesting that he and his other committee members were just looking for methods to make more money and make life easy for them

 

[Silly Sausage]

With instructors I often wonder who trained them and who trained the instructors instructor

I made myself popular with the instructor on a rope access course who said he was sitting on a standards committee and that they where looking at banning the use of tied knots in ropes in favour of preformed stitched eyes in the ropes having pointed out to him that this would preclude the use of rope diversions and they wanted the rules changing as they could not teach people to tie knots proficiently and they would make more money on the sale of rope as any damage near the end of the rope would render it scrap as the cost to get a new eye formed in the rope would be expensive, I concluded by suggesting that he and his other committee members were just looking for methods to make more money and make life easy for them

Good on you UNG!

As a climber, knot tying is an essential basic skill, you never know when or where you might have to tie off.

For roped access, to even think of banning the use of knots, or training of, is utterly mental!
It's a pitiful world we live in (sometimes)

 

[Adam W]

Presumably at some point it would be beneficial for one of the instructors to have actually gone out in the real world and practiced first hand what they are teaching; even better if all of them have.

Do you now need a degree and a PGCE to show an apprentice the ropes?

 

[UNG]

To get back on topic

May be the problem lies with City & Guilds or the course originator, the 2377 deals with PAT testing and totally misses the fact that all appliances portable and fixed need to be inspected and tested as with all these things it will take a few deaths before any one will take any notice

May be the 2377 needs to be revamped to remove the ambiguity it has created with regard to appliance testing and the clients obligations under the electricity at work act

 

[oldtimer]

To get back on topic

May be the problem lies with City & Guilds or the course originator, the 2377 deals with PAT testing and totally misses the fact that all appliances portable and fixed need to be inspected and tested as with all these things it will take a few deaths before any one will take any notice

May be the 2377 needs to be revamped to remove the ambiguity it has created with regard to appliance testing and the clients obligations under the electricity at work act

Yep I agree as I think that will be the case as it is now an embaressment because they sold it on the idea that a semi skilled guy could PAT test the only problem was that someone said one day ok that the fixed wiring and the portable appliances sorted and then somebody else pipped up and said what about the fixed appliances because they can be just as dangerous hence why we are haveing this debate and NIC are not interested (well actually they are but they choose to ignore this because they dont have the answer to the problem)

 

[72-van]

Yep I agree as I think that will be the case as it is now an embaressment because they sold it on the idea that a semi skilled guy could PAT test the only problem was that someone said one day ok that the fixed wiring and the portable appliances sorted and then somebody else pipped up and said what about the fixed appliances because they can be just as dangerous hence why we are haveing this debate and NIC are not interested (well actually they are but they choose to ignore this because they dont have the answer to the problem)

Is the answer to the problem the same answer that some members on the forum have given before a electricians licence from the "" government "" .No licence no messy about .

perhaps a defined scope 'pat' licence for those who can prove complete competence by doing a pat trade test .with recertification at each edition of the cop . bit like bs7671 16 th to 17th edition ?

in my humble opinion the next pat cop should make it crystal clear in its definition of competence and if cg 2377 is to be the one accepted part od this definition then the practical part of this course should be ammended to include those skills required for safe isolation .



bear in mind that i am not a spark (although i do a bit of pat) but can see the merits in sorting the current mess out perhaps it will remove some ticket slappers from the biz and get the prices to a level they should be at to make the job worthwhile . #

72-van
fife

 

[Adam W]

I envisage a 'PAT licence' being counter-productive - it will probably just be a box ticking exercise which you have to pay for every year or so, like the ECS health and safety test. For experienced electricians trying to do PAT properly but who don't do it all the time it will be even less worthwhile so the work will go to 'specialist' PAT companies who pay minimum wage to compete on price, ie the sticker slappers.

 

[72-van]

[QUOTEI envisage a 'PAT licence' being counter-productive - it will probably just be a box ticking exercise which you have to pay for every year or so, like the ECS health and safety test. For experienced electricians trying to do PAT properly but who don't do it all the time it will be even less worthwhile so the work will go to 'specialist' PAT companies who pay minimum wage to compete on price, ie the sticker slappers. ][/QUOTE]

I hear what your saying but my thoughts were along the line off a pat trade test similar to the one a spark takes at the end of his time.coupled with a update each time the cop edition changes .
i would at no time want to deny those sparks who are interested in this line of work from easily continuing to do so my objective would be to address the happy wi that ticket slappy operatives.

i am sure its only a matter of time before i hear of someone seriously hurt 5mins after a specialists slappy ticket day .

72-van