Becoming a Competent Person

[scousespark]

The fact you don't approve of the term does not mean it causes mass confusion to those people wishing to undertake electrical installation work (diy or for payment).

The Approved Document states that a 'Registered Competent Person' is a member of a self-certifying scheme, for notification purposes. If the OP wants to self-certify his jobs, he has to join a scheme.

Para 3.10 then indicates that an installer who can prove their 'competence' (in the true sense) to I&T may be able to pay a lower LABC charge, subject to the LABC accepting their qualifications.

 

[JohnW2]

The fact you don't approve of the term does not mean it causes mass confusion to those people wishing to undertake electrical installation work (diy or for payment).

It's not that I don't approve, or that I think it causes "mass confusion". You have to read my comments in the context of this thread, in which, from it's title onwards, the phrase 'Competent Person' did result in some confusion.

The Approved Document states that a 'Registered Competent Person' is a member of a self-certifying scheme ...

Not quite. It defines a 'Registered Competent Person' as someone who is "registered with a Part P competent person self-certification scheme". Given that they do not define "Competent Person", per se, those words are redundant (and meaningless) - unless they intend one to assume the (soon to die) BS7671 definition.

As I've said, it's presumably not just me who sees some scope for confusion. Lots of people much more clever than me who make up JPEL/64 appear to have decided to remove the concept (and definition) of 'Competent Person' from BS7671.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

I would say there is a great deal of confusion - or should that be ignorance.

You only have to look on other forums to find, after NINE years, people - supposedly qualified electricians - asking how they become competent (small 'c') and complaining that because they do not belong to a "Competent (capital 'C') Person Scheme' they are not allowed to do work in their own home.

 

[JohnW2]

I would say there is a great deal of confusion - or should that be ignorance. You only have to look on other forums to find, after NINE years, people - supposedly qualified electricians - asking how they become competent (small 'c') and complaining that because they do not belong to a "Competent (capital 'C') Person Scheme' they are not allowed to do work in their own home.

Well, as I've been saying, there is certainly some confusion - witness this very thread (which provoked my comments), and many others like it. However, I would not attempt to quantify 'the degree of confusion' - and am certainly not sure scousespark's reference to "mass confusion" corresponds to the language I would use.

As I recently wrote, it will be interesting to see if they persist indefinitely in calling them "competent person self-certification schemes" (App Doc P uses lower case throughout) after the concept of Competent Person(s) disappears from BS7671 (and seemingly has never been defined anywhere other than in BS7671).

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Will these be people who for 9 years have been refusing to do something as straightforward as to actually read the legislation and the Approved Documents?

Sorry, but I have little sympathy for people who claim to be "confused" but are actually just lazy and suffering from self-imposed ignorance.

 

[JohnW2]

Sorry, but I have little sympathy for people who claim to be "confused" but are actually just lazy and suffering from self-imposed ignorance.

I have some sympathy with that view, but I also think that those in positions of authority/influence ought to take reasonable steps to reduce the risk of confusion/ignorance - particularly when they have hijacked a word with a very well-established everyday meaning and used it to have a specific meaning (not even defined in the Building Regs or App Doc P). As I've said, it seems that JPEL/64 may well have taken this view.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

But that's just it.

If you'd paid attention, bothered to read the legislation, bothered to read the guidance, not gone off on some pathetic ill-informed rant about being branded incompetent, then you wouldn't be confused, no matter what the context of the word "competent".

 

[scousespark]

My comment related to the AD in which the term `competent` refers to a scheme member. There is no reference to the regs or the common language definition of competent.

 

[JohnW2]

My comment related to the AD in which the term `competent` refers to a scheme member. There is no reference to the regs or the common language definition of competent.

Nor is there any definition in the AD as to what a "competent person" is. As you have said, it defines "registered competent person", but I think many readers would take that to mean that one had to be a (not defined) "competent person" before one could become a registered one.

They are called (certainly in AD P) "part P competent person self-certification schemes". Does that mean something different from what "Part P self-certification schemes" would mean - and, if so, what? ... and, if not, why has "competent person" crept into the name, particularly given that they don't even define it (other than tautologically)?

Kind Regards, John

 

[scousespark]

The document merely states that a member of a scheme can self-certify notifiable jobs. The powers that be could have used acronyms or other terminology. If anybody wants to get up to speed with these terms they do what we have all done - they read up and ask questions (here and other places).

 

[JohnW2]

The document merely states that a member of a scheme can self-certify notifiable jobs. The powers that be could have used acronyms or other terminology. If anybody wants to get up to speed with these terms they do what we have all done - they read up and ask questions (here and other places).

That's all true. As you imply, nothing forced them to include the words "competent person" within the name they chose to give to the schemes - but they did (whatever they intended those additional words to mean). I suppose it's a case of it not being 'ours to reason why'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[scousespark]

It is just a term and the AD would probably have been clearer if the word competent had been omitted. We would still have had to familiarise ourselves with the terminolgoy used instead.

You work in the medical field and a surgeon who came across the term 'if these symptoms present, remove the appendix' would not go the back of the book and rip out pages. It is all down to context.

 

[JohnW2]

It is just a term and the AD would probably have been clearer if the word competent had been omitted.

Quite - that's really the (only) point I have been making.

We would still have had to familiarise ourselves with the terminolgoy used instead.

True, but (as I think you are at least partially admitting above) I would suggest that such familiarisation would be much simpler if they had not slipped in a word which (a) they had not defined, (b) had a well-established everyday meaning, and (c) had a specific meaning defined in BS7671 (which is clearly a 'related' document).

...a surgeon who came across the term 'if these symptoms present, remove the appendix' would not go the back of the book and rip out pages. It is all down to context.

It is - but one would then be deciding between two or more established/defined meanings of the word ("appendix") on the basis of context - and, as you imply, anyone reading that would know, in the context concerned, what was actually intended. Maybe I'm just dim and/or you are much more clever than me, but, although I obviously know the context, in the case of the self-cert schemes I haven't a clue what is the intended meaning of (undefined by them) "competent person" - is it's intended meaning obvious (from the context) to you, in the the same way that the intended meaning of "appendix" would be obvious (from the context) to a surgeon?

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

It is just a term and the AD would probably have been clearer if the word competent had been omitted. We would still have had to familiarise ourselves with the terminolgoy used instead.

I probably should have added that if you read this thread from the start, you will see that 'context' does not necessarily help. The OP had tried to familiarise himself with terminology ("I've read the wiki and done searches to no avail...") before asking his question, and the first two responses he got made an incorrect assumption about what he meant when he spoke of his desire to become "a competent person". This does not seem to me to indicate a situation in which there is no confusion, or scope for confusion.

Kind Regards, John

 

[scousespark]

Oxford Dictionary (online) definition for the word competent is
'having the necessary ability, knowledge, or skill to do something successfully.'

BS7671definition for Competent Person is
'A person who possesses sufficient technical knowledge, relevant practical skills and experience for the nature of the electrical work undertaken and is able at all times to prevent danger and , where appropriate, injury to him/herself and others'

I don't see a massive difference here, other than it refers to competence relating to electrical work. This would apply to ANY trade or profession. For gas work, replace electrical with gas and so on.

In the Approved Document the following definition is Appendix A
Registered competent person
A competent person registered with a Part P competent person self cert scheme
Para 3.10 refers to persons competent to issue BS7671 certs.

In ALL cases the only requirement is that the installer has the relevant competencies.