What is a competent person?
- Thread starter NewOrder
- Start date
Sponsored Links
I am not picking at you, but can you specify which regulations you find are over complicated.
Are you taking about the Wiring Regulations (B7671), Building Regulations (Part P e.g.), EAWR, which?.
In my experience, I have found that there is confusion and lack of understanding about these, how they relate to each other, and what they mean to us. That may mean that they not really complicated, or defined. Its knowing how they fit together.
As you will see from the above, there is confusion about the Statutory Instrument of Part P as legal entity, and the notification process.
BS7671 in this specific instance, but as you say, there is a lot of inter relation between the standards that cause confusion, and are all open to a level of interpretation which unfortunately not everyone sees the same way, which leads to both confusion and in some cases misinformation.
Sponsored Links
OK - which of the regulations in BS 7671 with which you will be complying when you do your complete rewire do you think are over-complicated?
Bear in mind that BS7671 ia a standard, not legislation. The use of the word "regulations" in the title leads a lot of people to believe they are statutory. Many years ago I believe the sub-title was something along the lines of "Regulations for electrical engineers", and that compliance with them was a requisite of continued membership of the IEE.
To return to the original question, the word "competent has 2 meanings; see the extract from the Concise Oxford Dictionary:
competent
n adjective
1 having the necessary ability or knowledge to do something successfully. >acceptable and satisfactory: he spoke quite competent French.
2 (of a court or other body) having legal authority to deal with a particular matter.
Many people consider themselves competent, in that they can make an acceptable job of something, but they are not 'competent persons' in that they do not have legal authority to do so. The use of 'competent' in the Competent Persons Schemes, is in the sense of the second definition given above.
Unfortunately sometimes people get upset at the suggestion that they are not competent, believing the suggestion to be that they cannot do something (be it a complete rewire, or changing a fuse) successfully, when what is actually meant is that however clever they are, they don't have authority to do whatever it is.
Indeed. However, the impression I got was that the OP was asking about 'competence' in the sense of the first definition - e.g. in relation to the ability to satisfy Part P of the Building Regs (albeit Part P does not use the word 'competent'), which does not require satisfaction of the second definition.
Kind Regards, John
Perhaps. I had the impression that the OP was confusing the 2 meanings of the word.
I'm still inclined to my interpretation. If you look carefully at the OP, it starts by suggesting that Part P requires work to be undertaken by a 'competent' person (which, as I said, and as BAS pointed out on Page 1, it doesn't!), and then goes to to ask only one actual question, namely:
... which I don't think had anything to do with membership of a Competent Persons Scheme (or self-certification). Mind you, I've been known to interpret questioins incorrectly
Kind Regards, John
Or being employed by such a half-wit, as it is the business which is registered with the schemes, not the individual operatives.
Are you saying that NAPIT is not an acceptable competent person scheme. (to those local authorities) It is still listed in the current schemes list.
No NAPIT is acceptable to all LABC - but the issue is one of competence.
My point is that on the 30th September 2012 I was classed as a competent person and yet on the 1st October 2012 when I stopped being a member of NAPIT I was not.
I read this
Up until last year I was a member of NAPIT
to mean "am no longer a member"
therefore implies no longer a member of a competent persons scheme
therefore no longer meets the "Member of a Competent Persons Scheme" criterion.
Wr have already established that being competent is not the same as being a Member of a Competent Person Scheme.
Up until last year I was a member of NAPIT
to mean "am no longer a member"
therefore implies no longer a member of a competent persons scheme
therefore no longer meets the "Member of a Competent Persons Scheme" criterion.
Wr have already established that being competent is not the same as being a Member of a Competent Person Scheme.
No, he clearly wasn't saying that - NAPIT remains as one of the main schemes. What he said, I thought very clearly, is that he ceased to be a member of NAPIT lats year (I think because he 'retired') and therefore is no longer regarded by LABC as being a member of a competent person's scheme (because he isn't!).
I sympathise with riveralt, and others in a similar position, in as much as he is obviously no less competent (in everyday sense) now than he was when he was a member of the NAPIT scheme last year. However, and this is the point which has been discussed, whether or not one can self-certify does not depend just upon how competent (everyday sense) one is but, rather, whether one is a 'paid up member' of a competent person's scheme.
It's the same in many professions. A doctor who doesn't pay his annual fee to the GMC doesn't suddenly become 'less competent', but cannot work as a 'registered medical practioner'.
Kind Regards, John
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
