Notification/Part P etc

[tonyelectric]

To be honest, quoting regulations verbatim to a layman is just going to sound like a load of jibberish, the way they are written assumes a lot of prior knowledge without which they resemble illiterate drivel

 

[Andydevon]

From a layman's perspective - yes it always useful to be reminded of Part P & BSI requirements for electrical work. I have learnt a great deal about what should be done and the limit that should be put on DIY electrics and the implications if you do decide to go ahead. However just quoting part P or a BSI number without putting this into the context of the issue being discussed is not as helpful as it could be.

By all means and it should fall as a duty of care to advise on the legislation and how it limits the work but please don't use it to slap down posters who don't yet understand the implications of their proposals / problems.

 

[Chri5]

Next your be suggesting that we should tell OP's not to do work to 17th standard.

My thinking is simple, electrical work has to be undertaken in a safe way with regard to keeping inside the rules. Those rules include BS7671 2008 and the Part P requirements.

Now people can do what the hell they like, but since I'm governed by the above factors when doing work it would be wrong for me not to suggest that OP's follow similar governance.

As for OP's knowing such stuff already, well some do and some don't. How happy would an OP be to take on a project, do the work and then discover that on sale of property they have a problem since the work was inside scope for Part P and they haven't conformed.

We'd all start getting stroppy posts saying "why did you tell me this, that and the other".

 

[Wangerman]

There is a difference between a poster helpfully reminding somebody of the regulations and a whole gang of people swooping down like regulation vultures and tearing the poor guy to pieces because he had the audacity to ask a question which might possibly involve performing diy electrical work.

Do people feel threatened or something ?

 

[PrinceofDarkness]

Which is more or less my point, Wangerman.

As far as I'm concerned, the advice given here should be such that the enquirer has a hint how to stay safe for the benefit of all around him - the issue of Regs and Notification takes second place in my opinion, since neither of those are any substitute for sound, safe practical advice.



Lucia.

 

[Stoday]

There's another aspect that I dislike; the interpretation of grey areas such that if there's any doubt, it should be notified.

My view is to interpret ambiguities in favour of not notifying.

 

[Spark123]

The law (Schedule 2B of the building regs) tells you what domestic electrical works do not require notification.
If the work isn't on the list then it is notifiable.

 

[PrinceofDarkness]

It isn't as simple as that S123. That schedule is far from comprehensive and the interpretation of it by various BCO's is often variable.

Stoday is correct in pointing out the 'grey areas'.


Lucia.

 

[ajrobb]

I for one was happy to be informed of Part P and the ability to do the work myself. Buyers' conveyancers try to find any excuse to beat the price down. If all the 'I's are crossed and the 'T's dotted, then they have less ammunition.

 

[Spark123]

I can't comment on varying LABCs interpretations, if they say it isn't notifiable then you are home dry. It doesn't help that the guidance issued in the approved documents doesn't always tie in with what the law actually says.
However from a Part P perspective if it isn't on the list in schedule 2B here clicky then I will take it as notifiable work.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Next your be suggesting that we should tell OP's not to do work to 17th standard.

It would be helpful if the person who declared that it was unacceptable for Chri5 to express this opinion would provide a rational, intelligent and mature explanation of why they think he should not have been allowed to.

My thinking is simple, electrical work has to be undertaken in a safe way with regard to keeping inside the rules. Those rules include BS7671 2008 and the Part P requirements.

Or, if they were happy with the above, maybe they could explain in a similar way why he was wrong to say that electrical work should comply with the Wiring Regulations and with the law of the land.

Now people can do what the hell they like, but since I'm governed by the above factors when doing work it would be wrong for me not to suggest that OP's follow similar governance.

Or maybe the pathetic, snivelling, insecure and inadequate little **** could explain why Chri5 should not be reluctant to suggest that people work to the Wiring Regulations and comply with the law.

As for OP's knowing such stuff already, well some do and some don't. How happy would an OP be to take on a project, do the work and then discover that on sale of property they have a problem since the work was inside scope for Part P and they haven't conformed.

Or perhaps he could explain why he believes that Chri5 should not have been allowed to express that concern.

We'd all start getting stroppy posts saying "why did you tell me this, that and the other".

Or this one?


In short, ****, do you have any logical reasons for saying that Chri5 should not have made his post?

 

[PrinceofDarkness]

I suppose you've been on the bottle again, BAS? Tut-tut!

Let me remind you that this is my thread and that you've foresworn my company by putting me on your 'ignore list'. How does that 'ignore list' work exactly - when I now find you posting on my thread?

I wouldn't mind so much, but your current cut&paste job makes very little sense this time.



Lucia.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

And whoever you are, **** (or ****s), I am never ever going to accept the corrosive vandalism of you voting down topics when you have no rational reason to do so, and criticising me for objecting to your anonymous sniping will do absolutely nothing except strengthen my resolve to carry on exposing your unjustifiable criticisms for what they are.

If you believe you have a justifiable criticism of something someone has written then be a man and say it openly so that your position can be considered, and if appropriate argued against.

If, OTOH, you don't believe you have any objections which would withstand scrutiny but just want to whine that you don't like something then please go away and don't return to this forum until you can behave with maturity and intelligence.

 

[bernardgreen]

A friend is selling his house and has all the necessary "legal" certificates.
One potential buyer said " certificates not worth the paper they are written on "

We are selling this house ( a 30 year old self built Walter Segal design ) and have no certificates for the work I did. Only a certificate of completion for the whole house. This lack of papers is seen as only a very minor problem as any sensible buyer will have a full survey done or will buy as seen and then inspect and up-grade as necessary after purchase.

That said having the correct certificates can make selling bit easier.

 

[riveralt]

We are selling this house ( a 30 year old self built Walter Segal design ) and have no certificates for the work I did. Only a certificate of completion for the whole house. This lack of papers is seen as only a very minor problem as any sensible buyer will have a full survey done or will buy as seen and then inspect and up-grade as necessary after purchase.

Seems that most buyers, probably at the insistance of their lenders and solicitors, are asking those sellers without proper building control notices to purchase building regulation indemnity insurance. A couple of hundred I think.