is a requirement for a periodic inspection ever statutory?

[stevie2011]

i know that you're supposed to get a periodic inspection done if there is a change of use or owner of a premises. but under what regulation is that and is it ever required by law?

just something that i started thinking about after talking to a new shop owner about how awful the electrics were in the place. being used to just doing the work rather than convincing people they need work done it was a strange new experience for me.

the question i'm starting to hear more often now is "do i really need to change that?" i can quote the 17th edition at them, but its non-statutory, and even then a lot of these old installations comply with an old version of the regulations.

all the electricity at work act 1989 tells me is that the installation should be of proper construction, correctly insulated and have means of isolation etc. basically be "safe."

 

[Silly Sausage]

The Wiring Regs are non-statutory, ie not Law. So basically you could just ignore them!
BUT, the key thing is, they can be used against you in a court of law, so personally I treat them as they are the Law, any work you do should comply with the regs.

As far as Inspections/Testing goes you can only recommend to the customer that it should be done every X years, can't force them to have it done I suppose.

 

[IQ Electrical]

i know that you're supposed to get a periodic inspection done if there is a change of use or owner of a premises. but under what regulation is that and is it ever required by law?

just something that i started thinking about after talking to a new shop owner about how awful the electrics were in the place. being used to just doing the work rather than convincing people they need work done it was a strange new experience for me.

the question i'm starting to hear more often now is "do i really need to change that?" i can quote the 17th edition at them, but its non-statutory, and even then a lot of these old installations comply with an old version of the regulations.

all the electricity at work act 1989 tells me is that the installation should be of proper construction, correctly insulated and have means of isolation etc. basically be "safe."

The question is, how does the duty holder comply with EAWR 1989 with respect to the system being without danger as far as is reasonably practicable?

In a factory environment, a strong, well-documented preventative maintenance regime can certainly be used in place of periodic inspection but in practice, such a system is rarely found.

So, the best way of showing compliance is by way of a periodic inspection but it doesn't end there:

The inspector must be competent and the duty holder must make efforts to verify that competence if the documentation is to have any validity should an incident occur.

Imagine standing in court with a 'drive-by PIR' in your hand from some guy with a mobile number in the local rag?

 

[stevie2011]

I'm very aware of what is required of the persons carrying out the electrical work.

but i see what you're getting at, there's two sides of the coin, customers who don't care about the quality of the work and contractors who can't produce the quality of work and nothing gets found out till someone gets a nasty shock or the place burns down and it ends up in court, which is rare. i've seen a lot of ropey work thats stood the test of time, somehow.

 

[Engineer54]

I would also think, that many commercial and smaller industrial premises would find getting or maintaining insurance cover increasing difficult. ...Probably this will also start affecting domestic premises in the future too...

 

[stevie2011]

yeah i always assumed keeping up with the regulations was a lot to do with insurance, but i don't know for sure. I think it was something to do with insurance that all the churches we did had a lot of MIC cable. just never read part of a quote specifying such things. would be interesting to know for definite.

The reason i created this thread is i often find myself stumped when asked if people really have to change something, and i often have to say "no, i can only recommend you change that." I'm just looking for concrete reasons I can say "you can leave it like that, but..." and reasons why people should have their premises or dwelling inspected regulary. I'm more confident now saying leaving blatent breaches of BS7671 uncorrected also in turn breaches statutory regulations like EAW and Part P.

 

[mogga]

"Maintenence Men " now arent doing MAINTENENCE but more and more its reactive duties and PPMs are a thing of the past or Machines are maintained at the maximul period allowed rather than more frequently hence more breakdowns and calls to contractors