Interpreting Part P for outbuilding electricals

[FunkyJive]

I have a mains feed to a garden workshop, terminating in a consumer unit offering 32A socket and 6A lighting circuits. However, I'm curious about how circuits wired by myself in the outbuilding would stand in respect of Part P regulations.

First, I am a 'competent person', having worked in the electronics industry for over thirty years, designing all manner of 2-ph/3-ph industrial and consumer products, and designing/commissioning bespoke mains-fed test equipment on factory floors. Electricals and electronics of any complexity are right smack in the middle of my comfort zone.

OK... so if I were to take feeds from the CU bus and run them to lights and sockets with suitable self-installed cables, maintaining the usual domestic behind-wall vertical/horizontal/150mm safety zones or earth-bonded trunking where apropriate (etc), is this likely to cause issues of any kind further down the line should I not pay the additional £££'s that accompanies notifiable work?

Basically, are there any allowances made for such installations performed by serving professionals in my position, or is it simply a 'Rules is rules' thing in every case regardless?

Many thanks,

FJ

 

[JohnW2]

OK... so if I were to take feeds from the CU bus and run them to lights and sockets with suitable self-installed cables, maintaining the usual domestic behind-wall vertical/horizontal/150mm safety zones or earth-bonded trunking where apropriate (etc), is this likely to cause issues of any kind further down the line should I not pay the additional £££'s that accompanies notifiable work?

Ther are really two questions here. The first, easy and non-contentious answer is that creating new circuits, anywhere, is always notifiable, regardless of who does it. As for whether 'issues of any kind further down the road' will result from your doing it, the answer is neither easy nor non-contentious - but, in relation to those who give the answer you don't want to hear, I would suggest that you ask them to cite real cases in which any such 'issues' (rather than hypothetical issues) have actually arisen.

Basically, are there any allowances made for such installations performed by serving professionals in my position, or is it simply a 'Rules is rules' thing in every case regardless?

That's another easy one. in terms of the official (i.e.'correct') answer. There is a requirement that any notifiable work is notified, regardless of who undertakes it - although, admittedly, the cost of so doing is much less if it is undertaken by a registered member of a self-certification scheme. So the system is not really being discriminatory by saying that any notifiable work undertaken by you should be notified.

BTW, you should understand that I write this as a non-electrician!

Many thanks,

FJ[/quote]

 

[bernardgreen]

I am installing circuits in two outbuildings as part of the renovation of a cottage I have bought.

The work has to be notified and the LA will need to see proof of your competence before they will accept your signature on the documents confirming the installation conforms to or exceeds the safety requirements for domestic installations which are generally based on BS7671.

There are a lot of differences between industrial and domestic installations. The main one is in industry it is ( often falsely ) assumed their will be a competant person on site who on a day to day basis will be able to detect faults and hazards as they arise. In domestic installs the designer must prevent ( as far as is reasonable ) any fault or hazard developing in the future.

First, I am a 'competent person', having worked in the electronics industry for over thirty years, designing all manner of 2-ph/3-ph industrial and consumer products, and designing/commissioning bespoke mains-fed test equipment on factory floors. Electricals and electronics of any complexity are right smack in the middle of my comfort zone.

Very similar to 15 years of my 40 years career in electronics. But it is not a clear sign of competence in domestic wiring.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

First, I am a 'competent person', having worked in the electronics industry for over thirty years, designing all manner of 2-ph/3-ph industrial and consumer products, and designing/commissioning bespoke mains-fed test equipment on factory floors. Electricals and electronics of any complexity are right smack in the middle of my comfort zone.

As long as you could genuinely sign a declaration like this:

I being the person responsible for the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing of the electrical installation (as indicated by my signature below), particulars of which are described above, having exercised reasonable skill and care when carrying out the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing, hereby CERTIFY that the said work for which I have been responsible is to the best of my knowledge and belief in accordance with BS 7671:2008 amended to 2011 except for the departures, if any, detailed as follows:

then you'll not have any problems regarding compliance with Part P:

Notification is a separate issue...

OK... so if I were to take feeds from the CU bus and run them to lights and sockets with suitable self-installed cables, maintaining the usual domestic behind-wall vertical/horizontal/150mm safety zones or earth-bonded trunking where apropriate (etc), is this likely to cause issues of any kind further down the line should I not pay the additional £££'s that accompanies notifiable work?

As long as you are truthful when you sell - i.e. if asked by a prospective purchaser if any notifiable work has been done you don't attempt to deny it, then in practice the only issue you're likely to face would be the need to get an inspection done at your expense. It's always possible that you'll get a bolshie buyer who wants you to knock the cost of a complete rewire off the price, but you deal with them in the same way you deal with any buyer looking for any excuse to chisel at the price.

Basically, are there any allowances made for such installations performed by serving professionals in my position,

None.

 

[Paul_C]

However, I'm curious about how circuits wired by myself in the outbuilding would stand in respect of Part P regulations.

If you were to extend an existing circuit by adding your lights and sockets, running the cables back to the board, and connecting them to the existing MCB's, then the work would be non-notifiable per 2(c) of schedule 4 of the building regulations:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/2214/schedule/4/made

Do the same job except for connecting to newly provided MCB's instead of to existing ones, and it becomes notifiable.

But who's going to know what was there already?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

As for whether 'issues of any kind further down the road' will result from your doing it, the answer is neither easy nor non-contentious - but, in relation to those who give the answer you don't want to hear, I would suggest that you ask them to cite real cases in which any such 'issues' (rather than hypothetical issues) have actually arisen.

Real issues #1:

To the best of our collective knowledge, nobody has ever been prosecuted for failing to notify. Dodgy work yes, but never a case of perfectly good work not notified.


Real issues #2:

To the best of our collective opinion, no council in its right mind would think it in the public interest to prosecute a householder for failing to notify. Dodgy work yes, but not over perfectly good work not being notified.


Real issues #3:

//www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=275610


Hypothetical issue:

However unlikely the risk, I would never suggest lying during a sale, and for the sake of a few £'00 worth of inspection turning the sale into fraud.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If you were to extend an existing circuit by adding your lights and sockets, running the cables back to the board, and connecting them to the existing MCB's, then the work would be non-notifiable per 2(c) of schedule 4 of the building regulations:

It sounds as if the OP has a CU in the outbuilding with no final circuits, so doing what you describe would be notifiable.

Do the same job except for connecting to newly provided MCB's instead of to existing ones, and it becomes notifiable.

It's notifiable if the MCBs were already there but unused.

But who's going to know what was there already?

Probably nobody, but so what?

Lying about a material fact in connection with a transaction to the value of hundreds of thousands of pounds is an extraordinarily bad idea.

 

[Paul_C]

It sounds as if the OP has a CU in the outbuilding with no final circuits

I took the first sentence of his post as meaning that there are already two circuits wired in the outbuilding. If that's not the case and it's just a "bare" feed to a board with nothing outgoing from it, then agreed that connecting anything would be notifiable.

Do the same job except for connecting to newly provided MCB's instead of to existing ones, and it becomes notifiable.

It's notifiable if the MCBs were already there but unused.

Agreed.

But who's going to know what was there already?

Probably nobody, but so what?

As you have acknowledged, there is not one single case we know about of any action being taken against a homeowner merely for not notifying notifiable work, even if the LABC becomes aware of it somehow.

So why pay £150 to £400 to the local authority if you don't have to?

 

[bernardgreen]

So why pay £150 to £400 to the local authority if you don't have to?

To avoid the risk of an enforcement order being issued if the work done without being notified is discovered to have caused a safety hazard.

It is NOT unknown for local authorities to act where a third party is put at risk from poor workmanship and to issue a notice to vacate the property until necesary remedial work is carried out.

 

[Paul_C]

To avoid the risk of an enforcement order being issued if the work done without being notified is discovered to have caused a safety hazard.

But we're not talking about shoddy work which poses a hazard, only about work which has simply not been notified.

 

[scousespark]

I'm a bit confused. The first line says you have a CU, with 2 circuits.
Then you ask if you can run cable from the bus in the CU (not sure what this means). Do you mean you have a CU, with no circuits?

As for competence, I'm an electrician and I know what happens up to the socket. I have no idea what happens inside my TV. As you are on the opposite side, why do you think you are 'competent'?

If you are installing circuits, what testing are you going to do?

 

[JohnW2]

Real issues #3:

//www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=275610[/QUOTE]
The timing of that other thread was indeed apposite. However, unusual though that situation is (almost unique in terms of things which have come to my attention), it would seem that the 'real issue' has fallen on the shoulders of a susbsequent owner of the propoerty. The LABC clearly must know the identity of the owner at the time the alleged work was undertaken, but have chosen to 'pursue' the new owner, not the 'culprit'.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Reportedly.

 

[JohnW2]

Reportedly.

Indeed. It is certainly the 'new owner' who has reported to us that he is being 'pursued' - and it really would make little/no sense for them to be doing that if they would also pursuing the perpetrator.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Quite.

This is electrical work we're talking about, not a structure so dangerous as to be a risk to the public, where I could see the sense in the council saying "You, the new owner, must sort this out before it falls on someone's head".

I would have thought the electrical conversation would go along the lines of:

"Did I do this work and fail to notify you"?

"No."

"Sur votre vélo, M. DCB."