Corgi

[Softus]

Think you should read up latest Gas regs Jan 2005...

Please could you direct me to any web site that published the "Gas regs Jan 2005", as I can't find any reference to them anywhere?

FYI, the following web site is a useful source of information on "THE BUILDING ACT 1984 AND BUILDING REGULATIONS: LEGISLATION":
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

I can't help wondering if you might be confusing the Gas Regulations with the Building Regulations. The former is the SI that defines who can carry out work related to gas, and the latter is a deployment of the statute known as the Building Act 1984.

You should also be aware that certain draft amendments to the Building Regulations, that are dated 2005, do not come into effect until 2006, and, therefore, are not yet law.

My conviction that you know what on earth you're talking about, having started off being weak, is fading by the minute...

 

[confidentincompetent]

...but goes on to say that if you employ a "CORGI registered installer...you will not need to involve a Building Control Service" Therefore, it would appear that should you be doing some DIY gas fire moving you will "need to involve a Building Control Service". This is a situation I have not heard about before concerning this argument. Does this mean that the DIY gas fire mover needs to notify Building Control and presumably after they have checked it, and found it to be safe, it will be deemed satisfactory and they will issue a certificate?

IMHO the answer to that is "yes". This is analogous to the fresh Part P influence on electrical work, whereby a DIY electrician, or tradesperson, can notify their LABC and expect an inspection and certificate when the work is deemed to be complete and satisfactory. In practise, getting the LABC to provide and pay for the testing has yet to become a universally successful outcome.

Ahhhhh at last. But note this was the law in 2003 when this was printed. New gas LAWS came into effect this year.

 

[Softus]

Ahhhhh at last.

Your cryptic comment would appear to mean that someone has at last asked the question that you meant to ask.

If you cannot write clearly what you're thinking, then it will make everyone's life simpler if you avoid posting on the forum.

 

[Stoday]

Think you should read up latest Gas regs Jan 2005

I've searched the 3,422 statutory instruments issued so far in 2005 and the only "gas regs" I can find are The Gas (Standards of Performance) Regulations 2005, SI 1135, which are not relevant to this thread.

Can you quote the SI number?

 

[Softus]

Can you quote the SI number?

There will now follow a period of silence, during which confidentincompetent considers his error in claiming that there are some new Gas Regulations, and works out how to cover up this error. This may take quite some time...

 

[confidentincompetent]

Think you should read up latest Gas regs Jan 2005

I've searched the 3,422 statutory instruments issued so far in 2005 and the only "gas regs" I can find are The Gas (Standards of Performance) Regulations 2005, SI 1135, which are not relevant to this thread.

Can you quote the SI number?

Nope I can't. As I said long ago I can Only quote from adverts I read in paper. and as I dont do gas I never have trawled through odpm. My main point was that Building control is required for any gas fitting unless by self certifying gorgi, and the problems that could arise re insurance, and selling the property.
http://www.corgi-gas-safety.com/section_gas_law/the_law.asp

 

[Softus]

Think you should read up latest Gas regs Jan 2005...

Please could you direct me to any web site that published the "Gas regs Jan 2005", as I can't find any reference to them anywhere?

...As I said long ago I can Only quote from adverts I read in paper...

Please could you direct me to any newspaper advert that published a reference to the "Gas regs Jan 2005"?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

YAwWwwWwwNNnn . This is where I got my unadulterated,dunce like stupidity from. http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c273/confidentincompetent/buildingregs.jpg[/QUOTE]
Surely you didn't buy that instead of downloading it from the ODPM website?

 

[Softus]

Hmm. Just noticed an extra part of your reply - didn't notice it last night, and suspect that you added it while I was composing my response. Anyway...

But note this was the law in 2003 when this was printed. New gas LAWS came into effect this year.

You refer to some relationship between a law being printed and being in force. There is no such relationship.

So, I continue to be unware of what you colloquially call "new gas laws" coming into effect this year, unless you're referring to the new changes to the Building Regulations 2000. I note that SI 2004:3210, regulation 3(5), states:

In relation to building work of a description within the first 3 heads of column 1 of Schedule 2A (installation of a heat-producing gas appliance, of an oil-fired combustion appliance or oil storage tanks and pipes, or of a solid fuel burning combustion appliance) where the contract for the provision of the work is entered into before 1st April 2005 and the work is completed before 1st July 2005, the principal Regulations shall continue to apply to that building work as if the amendments made by regulation 2( 8 ) had not been made.

My interpretation of all that is that, where SI 2000:2531 permitted installation of a gas boiler to be performed by a CORGI installer, without notifying the LABC, they must now notify in the way that non-CORGI installers always had to, although there is a caveat based on time to allow (I surmise) work in progress to be completed.

I don't know whether or not this supports any of the points that you've been trying to make, because they've all been so garbled. If it does, then so be it; the point I would make is that these changes to the Building Regulations are not contradicted by anything I've posted on this topic.

It might be that you don't realise that guidance notes, and explanatory notes, published by the ODPM, are not law, and that some of them are even wrong with respect to the law. For this reason I don't rely on them, don't refer to them, and don't quote from them.

 

[confidentincompetent]

YAwWwwWwwNNnn . This is where I got my unadulterated,dunce like stupidity from. http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c273/confidentincompetent/buildingregs.jpg[/QUOTE]
Surely you didn't buy that instead of downloading it from the ODPM website?

No ban, I got it free from planning office when I was there on another matter. Though I was only on dial up at the time and to download it would have taken about an hour lol.

 

[confidentincompetent]

It might be that you don't realise that guidance notes, and explanatory notes, published by the ODPM, are not law, and that some of them are even wrong with respect to the law. For this reason I don't rely on them, don't refer to them, and don't quote from them.

Right Sure lol.

 

[Softus]

It might be that you don't realise that guidance notes, and explanatory notes, published by the ODPM, are not law, and that some of them are even wrong with respect to the law. For this reason I don't rely on them, don't refer to them, and don't quote from them.

Right Sure lol.

It's not at all clear which part(s) of my posting you're scorning.

 

[confidentincompetent]

It might be that you don't realise that guidance notes, and explanatory notes, published by the ODPM, are not law, and that some of them are even wrong with respect to the law. For this reason I don't rely on them, don't refer to them, and don't quote from them.

Right Sure lol.

It's not at all clear which part(s) of my posting you're scorning.

Perhaps others will know.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Perhaps others will know.

OK, let's try and work it out, shall we?

It might be that you don't realise that guidance notes, and explanatory notes, published by the ODPM, are not law

That's undeniably true

and that some of them are even wrong with respect to the law.

And so is that.

For this reason I don't rely on them, don't refer to them, and don't quote from them.

Which only leaves that.

Can you find somewhere where he has relied on, referred to or quoted from them? (except to prove his first two comments about their relationship to the law and their accuracy - I guess he's allowed to do that....)

 

[Softus]

No ban, I got it free from planning office when I was there on another matter. Though I was only on dial up at the time and to download it would have taken about an hour lol.

The document you obtained is available as a PDF format file, the size of which is 1191Kb. For this to take "about an hour" to download your average transfer rate would need to be about (.sic) 330 bytes per second. However, even two years ago, a more usual transfer rate would have been at least 10 times that.

It's increasingly unsurprising that your postings contain factual and logical inconsistancies. You may wish to check that your pants are not currently ablaze, and then ask the Fire Service to stand down from their emergency stockpiling of another 250,000 litres of foam concentrate.