Part 'P' notification question?

[Bob Geldoff1234]

If notification under Part 'P' is a legal requirement for a consumer unit change, then if a person changed the unit,issued a non scheme EIC and didn't notify Building control then would the installation be deemed illegal?

I thought Part 'P' was to make sure that the installation was done to a high standard and by someone who is qualified to do the job.
Legally,where does someone stand who's had the job done but no Part 'P' when trying to then sell their house?

 

[buzzlightyear]

but no Part 'P' when trying to then sell their house?

up the river in a boat with out the paddles ,then the owner of the house will need to speak to the LBC for guidance .

 

[SJD]

I get asked on a regular basis by people selling a house, this is a quite common occurrence. Sometimes an EICR is done, sometimes the buyer is told there is no paperwork and they decide to proceed or not. Can't see why a seller would want to flag it up with LABC.

The buyer can maybe buy an insurance policy via their solicitor, they seem to sell them to cover all sorts of irregularities.

 

[buzzlightyear]

did a EICR for some customer the other day ,brought the house from the last person that had it and selling it ,part rewired it, new consumer ,I tested it unsatisfactory. can you imagine when the solicitor reads it ,what the F**K .

 

[Bob Geldoff1234]

But if it's a legal requirement to have Part 'P' then why are people getting away with not doing it? Could the install be deemed to not comply in the eyes of the law? And what,legally, does a homeowner need to do? Can the LABC come out 2-3 years later to certify the job?

 

[buzzlightyear]

but no Part 'P' when trying to then sell their house

bob you have not done a job and not reg it have you ,now come clean now ,before the boys in blue kick your door down .

 

[SJD]

Can the LABC come out 2-3 years later to certify the job?

The LABC's I know don't want to come out to certify anything, that is why they set their prices as high as they can get away with if asked to justify them, in the hope nobody will actually ask them to.

 

[Bob Geldoff1234]

I tested it unsatisfactory. can you imagine when the solicitor reads it ,what the F**K .

What was 'unsatisfactory'?

 

[buzzlightyear]

What was 'unsatisfactory

me ,LOL.

 

[Bob Geldoff1234]

bob you have not done a job and not reg it have you ,now come clean now ,before the boys in blue kick your door down .

Not me guv.Just had a enquiry from a customer asking me these questions and thought i'd ask the good folk on here for their opinions.

 

[buzzlightyear]

Not me guv.Just had a enquiry from a customer asking me these questions

DID THEY SIT YOU DOWN IN A CHAIR AND ASK YOU .

 

[Wilko]

When I bought my house it had a new gas boiler fitted the year previously with no paperwork or notification. So it clearly still happens even in Gas Safe land.

 

[Andy78]

The answer is that nobody cares, nobody will ever be prosecuted for not notifying work, and there are established get arounds already in place, for a cost, to smooth over any issues during a house sale.

 

[Wilko]

But if it's a legal requirement to have Part 'P' then why are people getting away with not doing it? Could the install be deemed to not comply in the eyes of the law? And what,legally, does a homeowner need to do? Can the LABC come out 2-3 years later to certify the job?

Hi - if it’s a change that requires notification and that’s not happened then it’s unapproved building works. If there was an electrical fire I reckon the building insurance company might make something of it. Similar to modified cars, if that makes any sense.
Homeowner could ask for advice from their Local Council Buildings Officer about how to regularise the work. As others have said an EICR may be acceptable to them.

 

[Rpa07]

The insurance through a solicitor to cover no electrical certificates costs less money than an EICR (properly done of course)!

 

[Wilko]

The insurance through a solicitor to cover no electrical certificates costs less money than an EICR (properly done of course)!

Yes, but the devil in the detail here is this policy won’t get the house rebuilt after an electrical fire. The policy would pay for remedial work should that be required by Buildings. Basically the insurance folks are betting that the homeowner is never asked to get the work regularised so it remains unapproved building works forever. That’s why it’s so cheap ...

And it encourages the homeowner to feel ok about this. But in my view, the fact that work is not registered must be an indicator that it may not have been done properly by a competent person, so it may not be safe.

 

[Rpa07]

Houses used to be ‘sold as seen’ - whether the hoops and hurdles that need to be fulfilled are good or bad is subjective BUT you used to be able to get a house for £30k whereas now that same house is £300k hence it needs to be up to spec OR sold as seen and priced to sell.

Yes, but the devil in the detail here is this policy won’t get the house rebuilt after an electrical fire. The policy would pay for remedial work should that be required by Buildings. Basically the insurance folks are betting that the homeowner is never asked to get the work regularised so it remains unapproved building works forever. That’s why it’s so cheap ...

And it encourages the homeowner to feel ok about this. But in my view, the fact that work is not registered must be an indicator that it may not have been done properly by a competent person, so it may not be safe.

 

[Wilko]

Hi - I think it’s still “sold as seen” with the original owner providing no warranties. It is common that prior to completion the buyer will ask for various things to be addressed. The seller can fix them in some way, knock £10 off or refuse to do anything. It’s always the buyer’s choice whether or not to proceed.

 

[Zerax]

Caveat Emptor is what it's all about... it's entirely up to the buyer to satisfy themselves that the property being purchased is 'up to spec' and as such, standard conveyance documentation states that no warranty is given.

However, as said before, if the purchaser insists upon it... it's very normal for a vendor to stump up the nominal fee for insurance (it really is peanuts) in case anything nasty comes back on the purchaser. Conveyancers are very keen to arrange this for some unknown reason.

 

[Dustydazzler]

up the river in a boat with out the paddles ,then the owner of the house will need to speak to the LBC for guidance .

Very easily resolved

The buyers solicitor will request that they purchase a indemnity policy to cover the works

This applies to boilers without a gas safe , a window without a Fensa and any building works without a completion certificate or without planning permission

There is absolutely nothing stopping a buyer proceeding a purchase

My uncle just purchased a bungalow that had a very recent rear kitchen extension that had absolutely no paperwork.
He paid for a survey to check the work and an indemnity to cover lack of paperwork.
The purchase went through like Normal