- Reaction score
- 1,512
-
Please checkout the new poll we will be pushing hard, and want some good stories to come out of this
result are public - you can change your vote over time, which might genuinely be the case from time to time.
- Thread starter IQ Electrical
- Start date
Discuss The future of Part P in question? in the Electricians' Talk area at ElectriciansForums.net
M
millwall ken
Whatever they do, it'll just be another money spinner for the big boys. Do you think that they will ACTUALLY ask anyone at the coal face for a simple idea or two?
Still long overdue, and may it die the nasty death that it deserves. ANY work that involves testing and the issuing of certification, maybe with the exception of a PIR - then I'm sorry but it should be mandatory that you are 2391. Anyone agree? Disagree? Think I should be confined to some sort of establishment?
OP
- Reaction score
- 1,512
I see your point but really, ALL work involves testing and certification.
I want to see decent fines for householders that use non-notifying electricians and a good campaign to publicise it!
I want to see decent fines for householders that use non-notifying electricians and a good campaign to publicise it!
M
millwall ken
Yer, you are right because all work is supposed to come with a cert, be it minor works, installation cert or a pir. I think that a good way to get it though people's thick heads would be via higher insurance premiums for uncertified works.
O
Octopus
Its all very well having these schemes and pressing for better qualifications, etc, but when are those in charge ACTUALLY going to do something about the unregistered cowboys?
The Marx brothers, Laurel + Hardy and Part p ,3 of the most comical acts in history
My veiw differs a little with Kens
I believe all domestic installation should be open to any Tom Dick or Harry who thinks they can install (just as well,because installation monitoring is un enforceable)
The assurance of standards could be via the Pir
Make it mandatory for house sales
Make it thorough and make the issuing of a report exclusive to someone with the 2391 and PI insurance
Make that report compulsory to be logged with the government and get rid of all the schemes
No more visual con tricks
No more hoodwinked customers
No more Qs oversigning,just truthfull competent assessments that have teeth
If they are negative then, reduced charges or penalties at the point of sale,increased insurance etc
My veiw differs a little with Kens
I believe all domestic installation should be open to any Tom Dick or Harry who thinks they can install (just as well,because installation monitoring is un enforceable)
The assurance of standards could be via the Pir
Make it mandatory for house sales
Make it thorough and make the issuing of a report exclusive to someone with the 2391 and PI insurance
Make that report compulsory to be logged with the government and get rid of all the schemes
No more visual con tricks
No more hoodwinked customers
No more Qs oversigning,just truthfull competent assessments that have teeth
If they are negative then, reduced charges or penalties at the point of sale,increased insurance etc
M
millwall ken
Sounds a like a good idea.
G
Guest123
I would love to see a level playing field between all the schemes, with fair advertising for all.
The mafia have ruled the roost for too long and need bringing down a peg or two.
The mafia have ruled the roost for too long and need bringing down a peg or two.
M
millwall ken
Here here Lenny.
- Reaction score
- 380
If you were to go the route of "qualified" rather than Competent to validate someone's ability you would still have to have a system in place to check their current competency, or you will have part time or retired or semi retired sparks doing work and they may not be up to speed even if they have their 17th.
ATB S
ATB S
A
accordfire
This has been the feeling for a while now - the fabled 2013 review.
I'm disappointed they're not taking the very considerable (and informed) advice offered to the committee(s) regarding Part B - regarding mandatory fitting of sprinklers in new builds. Further I find is disillusioning that they are still clinging to the option that it is possible to have such an idiotic thing as a "safe refuge" in the middle of a building burning hotter than hell.
Statistically, there is NO safe place in a building on fire. And to assume that disabled persons will have "at least some chance" in such a refuge, is, in my humble if outspoken, opinion tantamount to discrimination of the very worst sort. In a typical domestic setting a suitable sprinkler system could be fitted for a gross cost of no more than a few hundred during the build - WHY, oh WHY is it not mandatory?
They have missed more than a trick there, and once more in the absence of any recent fire related disaster NOTHING IS DONE to enshrine fire protection in LAW. Shame I can't call them arseholes in this forum!
Part P.
Well, at least they've got the clue we're not happy, huh?
However, I would not expect breaths to be held for any reasonable changes. The only change likely to take place to the requirements for compliance with Part P will be those that cost nothing to implement, or which do not put any further overhead on Building Control.
One change that is likely, I would have thought, is that no new build will be saleable without a full EIC, issued by a recognised Part P Sparks. Yeah, I know that's the idea now, but..........
Part of the problem here is that BC aren't electricians, and they're being asked in some sense to police specialist trades, for which they have no experience. This is essentially the same reasoning that Gas work went out initially to Corgi then to Gas Safe.
There isn't law available now to mandate any scheme provider to police the work by inspection either.
It is a mess without answer, really - because short of policing every bit of electrical work ever completed, the only way it can be policed is by putting the onus on the home owner/user. Even assuming a thorough audit of every electrician in the country each year, you'd still need to have awareness that "a person" was doing electrical work first.
Alternatively, do we police manufacturers? Well, we could - in terms of registering whom every part made was sold to, just the same way TVs are sold these days - but......it would simply create a black market for products, and open up the whole product safety issue again.
Fining home owners is all very well too, but how do you catch them any better than we do, or can, now?
No easy answers.....
P
pushrod
OP
- Reaction score
- 1,512
My emphasis should really have been on publicity to educate the public, surely there aren't many that haven't heard of CORGI or Gas Safe now?
It's taken years but people seem to understand that if gas is involved then a member of the above must be selected.
Maybe we could have such a system, almost licensing, that's what I'd like to see.
It's taken years but people seem to understand that if gas is involved then a member of the above must be selected.
Maybe we could have such a system, almost licensing, that's what I'd like to see.
J
jase
ANY work that involves testing and the issuing of certification, maybe with the exception of a PIR - then I'm sorry but it should be mandatory that you are 2391. Anyone agree? Disagree? Think I should be confined to some sort of establishment?[/QUOTE]
It was always my understanding that electrical work carried out to bs7671 included testing and inspection, whats all this 2391 all the time these days??????? 2391 used to be a more in depth knowledge of testing and inspecting but these days people seem to think you shouldnt even know what a a test probe is without having prior done some sort of college course- more expense(sighs)
It was always my understanding that electrical work carried out to bs7671 included testing and inspection, whats all this 2391 all the time these days??????? 2391 used to be a more in depth knowledge of testing and inspecting but these days people seem to think you shouldnt even know what a a test probe is without having prior done some sort of college course- more expense(sighs)
A
accordfire
It's likely to be the only way we will ever get any sort of compliance. Sadly, because of decisions taken previously, it will also take years, and millions to set up, assuming legislation to do so ever gets passed.
The problem is, unlike gas, we've gone so far down a route in a different direction from this, that getting back there will also be a logistical nightmare.
How, effectively, do you enable such a system without penalising perfectly competent electricians who, for no other reason than cost, have not either taken some of their exams, or signed up to one of the various recognition or approvals schemes, yet remain more than competent to carry out work?
Who will bear the cost of the licencing scheme? Are we proposing some sort of mandatory JIB here? It's the closest mechanism to licencing we have.
Now, I know that if every decent sparks in the UK put their paws in their pockets, we could probably find a few quid each toward something that had a decent purpose, and worked for us.....but, why should we? It already costs us all thousands just to be an electrician each year.
All that said, I suspect, sooner or later, that licencing will be the way.
brucelee
-
- Reaction score
- 691
If they want you to be a member of a scam why do they make you jump through hoops and have to go through LABC first, who when asked tell you incorrect information with regards who is supposed to inspect and test it
and the biggest scam is for them to say it costs £190 to send a ex joiner or similar out to inspect electrical work
and they may have to send another electrician to inspect and test your work even though you are qualified especially all the guys who have more than enough experience and qualifications
the only time a person should have to notify building control is if they are DIY or have no qualifications
and the biggest scam is for them to say it costs £190 to send a ex joiner or similar out to inspect electrical work
and they may have to send another electrician to inspect and test your work even though you are qualified especially all the guys who have more than enough experience and qualifications
the only time a person should have to notify building control is if they are DIY or have no qualifications
Last edited:
Markc
-
- Reaction score
- 147
Unless the issue is addressed at the grass root level I can't see any scheme along the lines of PP working.
We've all seen it, New consumer unit installed two or three weeks ago, No bonding, no cert and no PP. Customer not aware and not interested either! On further inspection no CPC loop on kitchen ring, no cpc in lighting circuit and 7.5Kw shower wired in 2.5 from pullcord to shower unit. 6mm at C/U. OK lighting circuit could be left but all the rest should of been addressed. So who's the sparky who do it? Someone out of the free ads who could get there the next day!
In my opinion its got to go by the way side as it doesn't work for those who do give a damn! Those who don't..well they don't give a stuff anyway and never will.
We've all seen it, New consumer unit installed two or three weeks ago, No bonding, no cert and no PP. Customer not aware and not interested either! On further inspection no CPC loop on kitchen ring, no cpc in lighting circuit and 7.5Kw shower wired in 2.5 from pullcord to shower unit. 6mm at C/U. OK lighting circuit could be left but all the rest should of been addressed. So who's the sparky who do it? Someone out of the free ads who could get there the next day!
In my opinion its got to go by the way side as it doesn't work for those who do give a damn! Those who don't..well they don't give a stuff anyway and never will.
- Reaction score
- 107
"the only time a person should have to notify building control is if they are DIY or have no qualifications"
I second that, brucelee!
I second that, brucelee!
P
pushrod
Or in my case £176 to inspect the plans for moving a socket in the kitchen
. No one minds paying a small administrative charge but present LABC charges just encourage people to break the rules and say "well i got an electrician to do it - i thought he was going to notify it - no sorry i can't remember his name"
P
pushrod
but at least with a course you prove your competence once, in the exam - rather than being taxed £400+ every year by your scheme provider. You pass your driving test once ... not every year!
Last edited by a moderator:
P
pushrod
House Insurance demanding a 10 yearly PIR from qualified person to continue insuring. Bearing that in mind the householder would dam well make sure that work was done by qualified/experienced people not just some chap from the pub. Your car insurance is invalid without an MOT, most people MOT their vehicles. It is unlikely that the sort of people who choose to live outside the law would own there own houses - the onus would then be on the landlord.
I doubt that too many people who own there own houses would risk their biggest asset by not insuring it.
Last edited by a moderator:
A
accordfire
No, they probably wouldn't, but your idealism is showing here..........
Realistically, if some geezer in the pub says he can supply the relevant paperwork for you to pass to your insurer for £50 or it's going to cost you £350 to get a full PIR, what are you going to do if you're fairly sure the £50 will get you by?
That was always the problem with MOT's too, until they started barcoding/databasing them - yet, there are still ways around that.
Anyone with half decent photoshop skills, and a clue about what figures are meant to be in the boxes will make a mint.
All these ideas make a fundamental mistake - in assuming that the homeowner actually give a damn WHO qualifies us, or WHAT bits of paper we pass on after the job. Most of them just want the shiny new light, or extra socket, and someone to bitch when it doesn't work right.
THAT, I am afraid, is a major part of what we need to overcome, as much as the scheme providers and legislators.
- Reaction score
- 380
Dude a great idea one I share but however we are ***** on that score
An MOT or a PIR is a day of issue, it means SFA the next day, you kerb the car MOT invalid..You break an accessory PIR invalid you get my drift, I suggest all properties are brought up to 17th on sale nice earner for sparks...safe for the the new occupants
An MOT or a PIR is a day of issue, it means SFA the next day, you kerb the car MOT invalid..You break an accessory PIR invalid you get my drift, I suggest all properties are brought up to 17th on sale nice earner for sparks...safe for the the new occupants
- Reaction score
- 67,268
good point, pushrod. the problem again is policing. without all sparks undertaking PIRs being registered like MOT garages.
P
pushrod
There will always be some people who try and get round the law, but i would think it would be a pretty stupid person who knowingly invalidated their house insurance (risking their biggest asset), especially when you know how any insurance company will use any excuse not to pay up. As you say centrally held data bases have largely removed the guy who would sell you an mot cert.
The other thing that is needed is education through advertising. 35 years ago lots of people would drive after drinking - now days the percentages are much smaller, why? because of public awareness campaigns. The same has happened with gas safety - even the wife asked to see the repair man's corgi card a few years back!
- Reaction score
- 67,268
a step in the right direction would be restricting sales of electrical equipment. we already have ID age requirements for cigs. and alcohol. why not have all qualified, competent sparks carry ID card proving that they are qualified/competent, similar to a JIB card. No card, No Sale.
A
accordfire
Yeah, you're right fella - I was making the same point not a day ago too. If it isn't done right though, people will buy dodgy certs, just the way they used to with car MOTs though. They already begrudge paying the insurance rates, and further costs especially in this climate, will cause more and more to fall outside the scope of the insurance, at least from time to time.
Education of the public is good, as id better policing of the industry, as is a scheme which works for everyone - but again, who will pay for it? Bet your bottom dollar it'll come down to us, on top of everything else we have to pay just to breathe.
A
accordfire
Good idea, except you'll have every last wholesaler up in arms, and dead set against you.
They couldn't care who they sell to, so long as they make a profit - their business is simply to sell, not to police who they sell to.
Sad, but true. Do that, and they'll (rightly) claim their isn't enough business to go around.
And by the time you add in all the sheds too - that's a big fight, with a lot of cash behind it.
- Reaction score
- 67,268
but, surely, the loss in sales to joe public would be compensated by joe public calling us in and then us buying the gear they would have bought. i would not restrict the sale of faceplates, light fittings etc. as they are jobs which could be done DIY. as for the sheds, they make enough profit anyway. never seen b&q selling gas boilers
P
pushrod
I agree, yes there would be some black marketing of restricted items, but the the vast majority of the public would quickly come to realise that fitting a new circuit etc,etc is not a job for them. It would be dead easy to do as well. Even screwfix has gone a little bit down that path with their "electrifix" branch.
BTW telectrix, your signature is brill
- Reaction score
- 380
Last edited by a moderator:
A
accordfire
No, perhaps not, but you do see Screwupfix selling them, and many small trade outlets too - the justification being that of course you'll get your local gas safe man to fit it.
I've no issue with restricting sales to the trade - just the certain knowledge that it would be taking on the might of every last wholesaler and manufacturer out there, and who would also be putting their prices up drastically too, to account for any reduction in volume.
And before you know it, the average cost of an additional socket outlet is £400. To be sure, that would work in favour of climate control, but, I just don't think there's any way back there.
Realistically, if a re-wire was priced to a point where it was costing £30k for an average domestic, how many fifty year old installations would we end up working on?
Economically, the money just isn't there to bear any of that kind of change, and I don't think we'll see restricted sales in our lifetimes.
A
accordfire
Yup. Fire safety, in particular, is my passion, I guess, rather than just a job - and it's scary sometimes seeing the ways and speed in which fire spreads.
I've long felt that sprinklers should be a mandatory fitting to new builds - both resi and commercial.
A simple multi-zone system wouldn't cost the earth in any house, needn't use any specialist parts not available now, and could make a real difference to saving lives, property, and more. Quite simply, a few runs of pipe round the building in the ceilings - sprinkler heads in each room, and zone controlled by a smoke detector in each area. That's all it would take in any house.
And to be honest with you, the issue of how to make safe disabled persons is fundamental - and it's always been ignored. The DDA doesn't really go far enough in terms of fire safety, and neither to building regs.
And it's more important than ever, now we're returning higher and higher numbers of physically maimed men and women from the various wars we're tied up in.
J
jase
and what would they deem as qualified? I am C+G 2360 (2 nights a week for 3 years) and 17th edition update qualified, but as i have not passed an AM2 or an NVQ3 aswell, the JIB will only give me an Adult Trainee card when i do my CSCS.
E
ezzzekiel
cant see the problem myself, i think partp works perfectly
OP
- Reaction score
- 1,512
I'm looking for the 'smilie' !
E
ezzzekiel
lol )))))
)))))
OP
- Reaction score
- 1,512
lol
That's better!
P
pushrod
Interestingly, i was in screwfix today and was held up for ages as the guys in front of me couldn't prove that they were qualified gas safe or the company they were subcontracting for were registered. Obviously in the trade as they had a van outside with name on, but credit to them as they refused to sell the parts without some written proof. Must admit i was surprised as i thought they were going to say something like 'well bring your card in next time'. So, times they are a changin'
OP
- Reaction score
- 1,512
Interestingly, i was in screwfix today and was held up for ages as the guys in front of me couldn't prove that they were qualified gas safe or the company they were subcontracting for were registered. Obviously in the trade as they had a van outside with name on, but credit to them as they refused to sell the parts without some written proof. Must admit i was surprised as i thought they were going to say something like 'well bring your card in next time'. So, times they are a changin'
Took me 45 minutes and our NICEIC certificate to get our Screwfix account transferred to electrifix, I was actually quite impressed by their integrity although I didn't say so at the time!
A
accordfire
Well fair play to Screwfix then, if that's they way they're playing it. They stand alone on that basis, so far.
Must look into this electricifx business at some point.
Must look into this electricifx business at some point.
Is it just me or does anyone else think the only people who know about part p are us sparks ? Getting really bored of explaining it to clients who have never heard of it !! There was a B&Q ad a while back of a fella switching on his brand new cooker hood, " you can do it " well technically he shouldn't be doing it should he if he'd heard of part p.
A
accordfire
Probably not. But I'm not sure you're totally right - not by the example in our house.......
"I can't switch the kettle on" says she - "it's in a special zone, and I'm not Part P registered!"......Cow.
My excuse is there's water in it, and I'm not a plumber.
Haha. It just kind of feels like we do our bit, the paying so much a year and being checked that we haven't forgotten how to do the job we all trained to do, for what? No one give's a monkeys about part p except us. Sheds still sell bathroom rated lights, mains boards etc for the untrained to "do it themselves". I can't see that changing anytime soon.
Thats why we are asked for 500 quid every year and given a sticker to put on the van.............
Reply to The future of Part P in question? in the Electricians' Talk area at ElectriciansForums.net
Similar Threads
Recently I read a blog post that says according to the latest study, in the United States, The Solar Industry Sales For Commercial Applications...
Just to be clear… I am going to do the correct thing here and pay for the correct parts…. I just wanted to start the discussion.
My particular...
This might come across as a really daft question to people who work with cable tray quite often but as part of my AM2, I am to clip FP200 to the...
I got my hands on an old floor standing fan and started looking to rewire it.
I found this part, I think it's a resistor, but was hoping someone...
Hi,
I'm interested in a house built around the 1980's in Northern Ireland. I took a few photos of the consumer unit etc. which is situated in the...
OFFICIAL SPONSORS
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc
YOUR Unread Posts
-
Is it safe to plug 2 extension leads into a double wall socket?It is the box room but yea not sure why there's only 1 but we have RCD protection. House from...
- Latest: jaybee1
-
-
Route in to Electrical Appointed Persons roles.Has anyone moved on to an AP or SAP role, currently JIB Graded Approved Maintenance...
- Latest: swirl
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.