"Part P" Electrical regulations

So the fact that you came across a cowboy who was (or claimed to be) qualified means that things were working fine and no one should try to do anything about cowboys, hmm, very rational. Greg

Am I the only one who thinks someone practicing medicine should be qualified?.

So they granted grandfather rights which was bad, but people are complaining that NOT granting grandfather rights to sparkies is bad. Basically, whenever you change something there will be winners and losers, and the losers will complain.

Personally I think all these governing bodies (or whatever you want to call them) should be part of government, not private companies looking out for them selves but effectively given the power to make laws. It may not make thinks any more efficient but at least they would be more answerable. The present farce with the CAA systematically killing off General (private) Aviation in this country is a case in point. Greg

The petition is here for those who wish to read it and perhaps sign:

That's just made me smile, a couple of my early experiments with electricity were along the lines of 'I wonder what happens when I connect both terminals on this cassette player mains lead together with a bit of wire?' (big flash & fuse blew in plug), and 'What does it look like inside a plug when it's plugged in and swithched on?' This one was impressive, I removed the top off the plug, switched off the socket and pushed the pins in with a screwdriver. I then switched the socket on to discover that nothing happens at all, that was until I tried to remove the fuse which caused a rather painful shock & aching finger, thumb, wrist elbow and shoulder !!! All this was done in the bedroom of my mums post-war semi, with no MCBs or RCDs to spoil the fun.

Oh the innocence of childhood .....

In news:oXHeSNJjH$ snipped-for-privacy@raefell.demon.co.uk, hugh wibbled :

Please, stop refering to 'professional', tradesman or craftsman if you like, but professional?

Nonetheless, those IEE members like me, who work directly in the field were also denied. What gets me is that a big scheme has to be signed off by a real Engineer, and then can only be inspected by NICEIC pillocks, not the people who would actually understand it, as a consequence of having designed it.

And, as a chartered engineer, I believe the regs still permit me to overrule the same regs if, in my professional opinion, there are extenuating reasons.

Steve

Yes, red faces all round.

Steve

But as with the LPGA that is exactly the point. There are just as many cowboys inside the certified group as outside. Being certified isn't a guarantee of quality work so I might as well have done it myself in the first place and saved a shed load.

In message , Andrew Mawson writes

I think I'll start a new political movement - the Politically Incorrect Party

Policy No 1 -All advisors, consultants, inspectors etc. to be lined up and shot

Policy No 2 - Repeat Policy No 1

sign:

Incorrect

How do I join - the worm is turning !!!

AWEM

On or around 25 Jan 2007 01:00:09 -0800, "Greg" enlightened us thusly:

not immediately, I'll admit, but I bet I can find out. Mind you, I wonder how many extant installations conform?

The easy way to find out is to buy a copy of the regs and the on-site-guide, it's all in there if a bit dry reading 8-). A good proportion of existing installations do basically conform, they at least have the earth electrode and overall RCD where needed etc. But there are plenty that are plain dangerous and one aim of the regs and part P is to gradually bring them in line. If the government had gone ahead with seller's packs it would have accelerated this no end, but they've suspended the idea. Greg

True, the reasoning was that there would have had to be some way to separate people like yourself, from people like a previous colleague who was also a chartered engineer, he discovered he knew f*ck all about the regs when he built his own house and the board flatly refused to connect him when they saw his work 8-).

The IEE didn't want to have to do the vetting so it was left to the schemes to do it. You could walk into NICEIC, just show your qualifications, a couple of samples of your work and the colour of your money.

Not sure what you mean here, the schemes are only about domestics, i.e. from a domestic meter onwards. Surely any big scheme is not domestic by definition so comes under industrial and so is exempt from part P. That's why I did the proper 16th edition and inspection and testing courses instead of the cut-down domestic only part P course, so I'm qualified on bigger installations as well which is what I do for a living (generating sets).

As I understand it it doesn't matter if you're a charted engineer or not, any sparky theoretically has the option to deviate from the regs, that's why there is a box on the forms for "deviations from...". But it was made very clear to us that if you ever put anything other than "none" in that box you had better be prepared to justify your actions in court if anything ever went wrong, because following the regs is fundamentally about showing that you've taken reasonable care and arse covering. Deviating is like sticking your head over the barricade, you may get it shot off!. Chartered or not, I would not choose to do that when there's no reason. Greg

The difference is that if you had employed a certified tradesman (cowboy or not) your insurance would have no way to get out of rebuilding your house after the electrical fire, if you had done it yourself they would... Greg

No need, just emigrate to a third world country and you'll get the same result overnight. Greg

But only because of the dammed Part P! Without it, insurance is not an issue - it's introduction has *caused* the insurance issue, so that's another reason why it is a bad thing - far from helping, it's invented a whole new raft of problems!. The insurers are going to claim from the tradesman, and yet again Jo Public is going to be piggy-in-the-middle while they squabble about it. Not exactly a benefit.

Richard

I'll sign up!

Yep - if they are so dammed clever, why are they advising/consulting instead of making a mint! Well, they mostly are, but not for their clients......

Don't mind them, if their terms of reference are sensible. Unless, of course, I fail my MOT......

Sounds reasonable - but only come the revolution!

Richard

Sorry, forgot the "Brother" on the end there. And/or "Sister". Oh, and hermaphrodites of course.

Richard

On or around 26 Jan 2007 00:12:52 -0800, "Greg" enlightened us thusly:

See, this is one of my complaints about this, and it's the same one as about the LPGA - it's trumpeted as being all about safety, but then you have to spend (in the LPGA's case, at least) quite a lot of money to actually get your hands on the code of practice (unless that's changed). There are people who really do care about safety who've made COP-11 public. If LPGA were really concerned about safety, they'd make the COP available for a nominal sum to anyone who wanted it - having the COP in the public domain can't make anything less safe. Same applies to the wiring regs: if it's really about safety, and bearing in mind this is the government we're talking about this time, they should be available for free download, or in printed for a suitable charge to cover the cost of printing. Note, I've not looked into how much they cost.

In fact, of course, the LPGA are mostly concerned about their own profits. This is quite OK all the time they're openly a trade association out for profit. But they're trying to set themselves up as "the" authority, and that everyone HAS to conform to their COP. Damn, I said I wasn't going to rant about the LPGA