Part P amendments

[ebee]

Good lad Ban. I knew you`d be on the ball with this

 

[BOB NUTS]

I'll try and get my condensed guide updated soon...

FYI, given that what had previously been advice in an ODPM circular is now explicitly in the Approved Document, (1.26) I've emailed LABC Services and the District Surveyor's Association asking then when they plan to update the information on their websites that advises local authorities to ask DIYers etc to provide EICs from 3rd party electricians....

where in law does it say that the council must test for the diy'er? the approved document is only guidance

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Indeed it is. But given how keen LABCs are to implement other Approved Documents as if they were law (I'm thinking particularly about their stance on accessory heights, and the complete fabrication of a "requirement" for luminaires that only take high-efficiency lamps), they'll be on shaky moral ground to ignore what it says.

Also I'd reply "where in law does it say that the DIYer must provide electrical certificates?"

 

[kai]

Even fixed work connected by a 13amp plug and socket is covered now, probably to get round a loophole.

 

[BOB NUTS]

just kidding BAS , but seriously you cant have your cake and eat it - either acknowledge the significance of the approved documents or stick with the law

the approved documents may not be law but they are as good as. Imo they are what would be refered to as the minimum standards if any case arrived in court - unless demonstrated otherwise. The accessory heights are taken from the british standard and the 'lamp' issue has been cleared up in the new regs (im sure there must be more boo-boos in the new documents ). I think BS7671 calls for testing and inspection, so if installing to BS7671 carrying out certification and testing is part and parcel - again the imo BS would be the benchmark guidance in court unless demonstrated otherwise.

 

[securespark]

Ban, in view of your comment on heights, what is your take on my thread?

//www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=47443

 

[ebee]

If BS7671 is sited then it must be sited in its entirity (including inspect & test)

 

[securespark]

Sorry, EB, what has this to do with mounting heights? Or have I misunderstood you? Indeed, were you directing your post at me??????!!

 

[ebee]

No secure I was answering Bob nuts - sorry

 

[securespark]

No secure I was answering Bob nuts - sorry

Ooops = Sorry!!

 

[Softus]

the approved documents may not be law but they are as good as.

Imo they are what would be refered to as the minimum standards if any case arrived in court - unless demonstrated otherwise.

Hope you don't mind me asking - what is this opinion based upon?

...again the imo BS would be the benchmark guidance in court unless demonstrated otherwise.

What reason do you have for believing that this is how the courts work?

 

[BOB NUTS]

court cases and determinations - what do you base your opinions on - the beano?

 

[Pensdown]

Even fixed work connected by a 13amp plug and socket is covered now, probably to get round a loophole.

Hopefully the 7671 definition of fixed equipment will be used otherwise this will be a mess

 

[ban-all-sheds]

just kidding BAS , but seriously you cant have your cake and eat it - either acknowledge the significance of the approved documents or stick with the law

I'm happy to do that.

But so many LABCs have been going beyond the law, and making requirements that are neither in the law nor in the Approved Document that it will be nice to be able to quote an AD paragraph at them.

the 'lamp' issue has been cleared up in the new regs

How so?

I've looked at the latest SI ( http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/20060652.htm ) and I see nothing there..

I think BS7671 calls for testing and inspection, so if installing to BS7671 carrying out certification and testing is part and parcel - again the imo BS would be the benchmark guidance in court unless demonstrated otherwise.

But the Building Regulations do not require working to BS7671.

In fact, they no longer even require testing.

I would suggest that anyone submitting a notification simply writes on it "Reasonable provision will be made in the design and installation of the electrical installation in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installation from fire or injury."

 

[Pensdown]

In fact, they no longer even require testing.

Is that your interpretation of 1.27?