Should Part P get scrapped?

[Scoter1066]

The Govt are currently reviewing Part P apparently, as they want to know if it has been successful.

Considering it hasn't been publicised, is seen as a money making scheme, and drives people into the arms of Vaslav and his chums, maybe we are better off without it?

Why should we have to pass exams and constantly prove ourselves (along with plumbers) to authorities, but get a scruffy jumper and a beaten up old van and you can call yourself a builder and start knocking supporting walls down?

 

[ericmark]

To have to pass an exam of some type to be able to call one's self an electrician or any of the other trades does make sense.

This was done many times from the Trade Union card onwards.

Just as it was made illegal to have a closed shop with Trade Unions so should all the other clubs what ever their name also be banned from demanding money as a subscription in order to allow people to apply their trade.

What is needed is a licence similar to a car licence where if convicted of malpractice it will be endorsed.

This would not be issued to the employer but employee. That is the problem with Part P. A firm can employ anyone to do electrical work Part P only really regulates the sole traders. My son with a 2391 was employed to inspect and test other tradesmen's work and although he would catch most faults and an electrician doing bad work would be got rid of there was nothing stopping the electrician joining another firm and continuing to trade as an electrician.

So Part P has cracked down on sole traders but it has also created a market for the chancer who by offering to do work cheap without paperwork has been able to get more work as a result of Part P. In the same way as people offering to do work on the side and not charge VAT these cow boys can prey on the poor householder who is trying to cut costs. The very people Part P was designed to protect.

Had the minimum charge for Part P through the LABC started at £20 for site visits of less than 1 hour for the simple jobs like adding one socket in a kitchen then it may have worked. What killed it is the ridiculous minimum charge.

So as it stands yes scrap it. But it does need some qualification that a tradesman can show so Joe Public know they are what they say they are. This includes all trades not just Electricians.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Where most people go wrong is in not realising that -

It's not supposed to make sense.


To be more constructive -

No one can argue that Part P (itself) of the Building Regulations, however flimsy, is anything but common sense.
However, Schedule 4 and the scheme requirements certainly need revising.


Once reviewed how will the Government decide if it has been successful or otherwise?
Will they just count the money?

Will statistics of deaths and injuries prove anything?
As there were so few deaths and injuries before Part P what if there had actually been an increase?

It is merely badly thought out and implemented.
Therefore probably the least likely to be repealed as that would mean admitting such.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The Govt are currently reviewing Part P apparently, as they want to know if it has been successful.

Who says so?

Considering it hasn't been publicised,

It's been as publicised as any other of the Building Regulations. Should they all be abolished because some people haven't heard of them?

is seen as a money making scheme,

Only by the ignorant, the stupid or those with an ulterior motive for describing it so.

If you wish to claim it is that then decide now which of those 3 classes you wish to be a member of. You may be a member of more than one if you wish.

and drives people into the arms of Vaslav and his chums,

That's complete b*ll*cks, only believed by the ignorant, the stupid or those with an ulterior motive for saying so.

maybe we are better off without it?

Who is "we"?

Why should we have to pass exams and constantly prove ourselves (along with plumbers) to authorities,

Because that's what being a professional is all about. Don't you want to be one?

but get a scruffy jumper and a beaten up old van and you can call yourself a builder and start knocking supporting walls down?

Have you not heard of Part A?

 

[ebee]

I would hope that it is constantly being reviewed.

It is not publicised enough.

We should update our knowledge via courses,exams, renewing regs books and guides etc.

(If you say the above costs far too much then I think not many would argue with that).

Since Part P then many more people have sat exams, courses, got test gear, got it calibrated, hopefully know how to use it , got regs/guides/EAW etc - surely that is (One hopes) an improvement?

More people are signing a bit of paper saying "I am liable for .... Design,..........Install, ..........Inspect & Test............... etc" making it not only more traceable but might encourage the signatory to be a bit more diligent about the works they are signing for.

It might be more practical if ALL works were notifiable as adding points and tightening connections is way above some folk.

Fee structure does seem disproportionate - maybe they really want to discourage but not disallow the via LABC route.

If you were to say that making people retake driving tests every ten years or so would save more lives and injuries I would not argue with that.

 

[skotl]

One thing that's puzzled me (assuming I am correct!) is that there is no Part P in Scotland. Why is that

 

[EFLImpudence]

It's something to do with West Lothian.

 

[skotl]

It's something to do with West Lothian.

But lots of other regs apply to England, Wales, Scotland and NI... Can't see why electric regs should be different - must be confusing for sparks on the border!

 

[RF Lighting]

AFAIK you have an entirely different building regs system in Scotland.

 

[chivers67]

I think from the Newbies trying to start a business up the answer would be a clear yes as it costs over £1000 just to start up in terms of registration costs/insurance/testers. Seems like the term "jobs for the boys" was made for it.

In terms of notification it does seem rediculous that someone that isn't registered still has to notify - however qualified they are.

The cost of registering, notification and how the whole domestic electrical installations are policed is the real crux of the matter.

 

[scousespark]

It is under review and I worry that the scheme operators will push forward to try to get DIY electrics oultawed.

I don't see the problem with people in the trade having to register.
The issue I have is that we seldom hear of any non-registered tradesmen being prosecuted for doing work without notifyiing.

As was said earlier, the LABC fees are non-sensical for a DIYER. It seems the charges are being used to deter people going down the LABC route and this suits the scheme operators.

Before Part-P, there were government stats relating to deaths/injuries caused by dodgy electrical installtions. I think there were about 7 deaths a year. The gvt stopped collecting these stats around the time that Part-P came into force, so it's impossible to say if it is safer now then it was in 2004.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I think from the Newbies trying to start a business up the answer would be a clear yes as it costs over £1000 just to start up in terms of registration costs/insurance/testers.

But you face 2 out of 3 of those costs anyway, and registration is under 50% of the total of all 3.

Yes, it's still an expense, but it adds up to less than the price of 10 cigarettes a day, and plenty of people, including some electricians, seem to manage to afford that.

 

[chivers67]

I think from the Newbies trying to start a business up the answer would be a clear yes as it costs over £1000 just to start up in terms of registration costs/insurance/testers.

But you face 2 out of 3 of those costs anyway, and registration is under 50% of the total of all 3.

Yes, it's still an expense, but it adds up to less than the price of 10 cigarettes a day, and plenty of people, including some electricians, seem to manage to afford that.

Cigarettes are pretty expensive these days!

I think that if there was something similar to the gas register scheme for electricians it would be an improvement. They pay £190+Vat or £170+Vat for renewing. Registering as a Part P electrician is a bit of a rip off. Ok it's not a massive cost over a year but still pretty pricey whoever has to pay it.

 

[RF Lighting]

In my experience many reputable electricians registered with a scheme long before part P was ever dreamed up.

I worked for a firm 15 years ago which was NICEIC registered.

If nothing else being a member of a scheme is a great advertisement, and will give confidence to customers to choose you over someone who isnt.

I can afford scheme membership and 10 cigarettes a day

 

[JohnW2]

Before Part-P, there were government stats relating to deaths/injuries caused by dodgy electrical installtions. I think there were about 7 deaths a year. The gvt stopped collecting these stats around the time that Part-P came into force, so it's impossible to say if it is safer now then it was in 2004.

Indeed. Such statsitics always were pretty iffy (difficult to collect with any accuracy). However, if one took them at face value, even prior to Part P the number of deaths due to dodgy electrical installations was, in cold impassionate terms, pretty insignificant - e.g. less than the number of deaths due to say, falls from ladders, and the number of deaths per year believed to be due to such causes was similar to the number of deaths per day on the UK roads.

Whatever other arguments might have existed for the introduction of Part P, I do not personally think that, in terms of the big picture, prevention of deaths would have been a very viable one.

One thing that people seem to forget is that Part P, per se, probably did not change the law all that much. Even prior to Part P, someone who undertook electrical work with so little competence/regard for safety that it resulted in a death was already on wrong side of the law.

Kind Regards, John.