This isn't the end of the story, just an update. Further info may
follow when I've followed up.

I have been politely pestering my MP about the new electrical regs
which are being imposed from next April, because those regs are a
threat to my business in so far that they require certification of
work, and I'm not (yet) qualified to provide that certification. That
means that for some jobs around the home where a test certificate will
need to be issued I probably won't be able to take the work on.

Just received a reply from Nick Raynsford MP (minister responsible for
this crap), c/o my MP. In this reply NR advises that if I can't do the
certificates myself there is an easy way out - call in the local
council who will do the test and issue a certificate - at a cost of
course. NR advises that householders will be happy with this
additional cost because they will be reassured that the work carried
out meets the regulations (sure they will....).

Anyway, got on the phone to the local council at the end of last week,
asking the questions "if I've got to get the local council to do this
as advised, then what is the procedure, how much does it cost, and
what is the turnaround time?".

Quick answer: "What new regulations?". More discussion follows where I
politely explain what's going on. Even quicker answer comes back:
"That's madness". Oh dear, it seems that local councils aren't happy
with what's going on in central government.

This morning I got a call from the manager of the department in the
local council that is responsible for these sorts of things. He'd been
away for a few days and was wondering what the note on his desk was
all about. I explained. His response: "Well I know there is going to
be new regs coming along in the future, but no-one has told us
anything about it being from April". Furthermore, it turns out that he
is a member of NICEIC and reads all their publications, and the NICEIC
apparently know nothing about the imposition next April either.

As far as costs go, they haven't figured that out yet. But I am
advised that it would have to be a minimum of 50 quid. More likely 100
quid, and if it requires a full test of the installation then there
wouldn't be change out of 200 quid. Householders are really going to
love this extra charge aren't they! And if they get a sparky in to do
the work who is qualified to issue certificates on completion then the
dear old sparky is going to ramp up his prices in the knowledge he's
now got a captive audience to squeeze the life out of.

Now get this extra info which was kindly provided to me today.
According to my source (who I consider to be very reliable given his
position in the organisation) council employees are forbidden by law
to set foot on or work on private premises, so there's no way they can
carry out these tests and certifications.

Anyone spot a problem with these new regs yet?

If you haven't already, get cracking with letters to your MPs folks.

PoP

"PoP" wrote in message
...
This isn't the end of the story, just an update. Further info may
follow when I've followed up.

I have been politely pestering my MP about the new electrical regs
which are being imposed from next April, because those regs are a
threat to my business in so far that they require certification of
work, and I'm not (yet) qualified to provide that certification. That
means that for some jobs around the home where a test certificate will
need to be issued I probably won't be able to take the work on.

Just received a reply from Nick Raynsford MP (minister responsible for
this crap), c/o my MP. In this reply NR advises that if I can't do the
certificates myself there is an easy way out - call in the local
council who will do the test and issue a certificate - at a cost of
course. NR advises that householders will be happy with this
additional cost because they will be reassured that the work carried
out meets the regulations (sure they will....).

Anyway, got on the phone to the local council at the end of last week,
asking the questions "if I've got to get the local council to do this
as advised, then what is the procedure, how much does it cost, and
what is the turnaround time?".

Quick answer: "What new regulations?". More discussion follows where I
politely explain what's going on. Even quicker answer comes back:
"That's madness". Oh dear, it seems that local councils aren't happy
with what's going on in central government.

This morning I got a call from the manager of the department in the
local council that is responsible for these sorts of things. He'd been
away for a few days and was wondering what the note on his desk was
all about. I explained. His response: "Well I know there is going to
be new regs coming along in the future, but no-one has told us
anything about it being from April". Furthermore, it turns out that he
is a member of NICEIC and reads all their publications, and the NICEIC
apparently know nothing about the imposition next April either.

As far as costs go, they haven't figured that out yet. But I am
advised that it would have to be a minimum of 50 quid. More likely 100
quid, and if it requires a full test of the installation then there
wouldn't be change out of 200 quid. Householders are really going to
love this extra charge aren't they! And if they get a sparky in to do
the work who is qualified to issue certificates on completion then the
dear old sparky is going to ramp up his prices in the knowledge he's
now got a captive audience to squeeze the life out of.

Now get this extra info which was kindly provided to me today.
According to my source (who I consider to be very reliable given his
position in the organisation) council employees are forbidden by law
to set foot on or work on private premises, so there's no way they can
carry out these tests and certifications.

Anyone spot a problem with these new regs yet?

If you haven't already, get cracking with letters to your MPs folks.

PoP


Have you noticed that the NICEIC are now advertising on bus stops etc.
Probably just a coincidence.

Adam

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:52:38 GMT, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:





Have you noticed that the NICEIC are now advertising on bus stops etc.
Probably just a coincidence.

Adam


Alongside the other prostitutes, no doubt.......



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:40:15 +0100, PoP
wrote:

This isn't the end of the story, just an update. Further info may
follow when I've followed up.

I have been politely pestering my MP about the new electrical regs
which are being imposed from next April, because those regs are a
threat to my business in so far that they require certification of
work, and I'm not (yet) qualified to provide that certification. That
means that for some jobs around the home where a test certificate will
need to be issued I probably won't be able to take the work on.

Just received a reply from Nick Raynsford MP (minister responsible for
this crap), c/o my MP. In this reply NR advises that if I can't do the
certificates myself there is an easy way out - call in the local
council who will do the test and issue a certificate - at a cost of
course. NR advises that householders will be happy with this
additional cost because they will be reassured that the work carried
out meets the regulations (sure they will....).

Yep. I had that letter as well. It's one of his standard ones
where he thinks that he has an answer that will appease people doing
DIY electrical work. He's deluded, I think.



Anyway, got on the phone to the local council at the end of last week,
asking the questions "if I've got to get the local council to do this
as advised, then what is the procedure, how much does it cost, and
what is the turnaround time?".

Quick answer: "What new regulations?". More discussion follows where I
politely explain what's going on. Even quicker answer comes back:
"That's madness". Oh dear, it seems that local councils aren't happy
with what's going on in central government.

Why am I not surprised? Of course the reality is that the local
authority isn't even intended to do inspections because one isn't
really intended to do anything other than employ a NICEIC registered
electrician.

With Johnny TwoJags squeezing the local authorities from the other
end, the government can pretend to have made a real saving because the
scam (sorry scheme) appears to be self funding because of self
certification.

Of course, what is really happening is the creation of another closed
shop whereby the government can keep tabs on yet another sector which
might have been working for cash. I don't condone that, but this is
an underhand way of putting some bureaucracy around self employed
electricians and small traders that dies not need to be there. The
so called savings of accidents are a complete whitewash.

In effect, of course, this is another stealth tax.


This morning I got a call from the manager of the department in the
local council that is responsible for these sorts of things. He'd been
away for a few days and was wondering what the note on his desk was
all about. I explained. His response: "Well I know there is going to
be new regs coming along in the future, but no-one has told us
anything about it being from April". Furthermore, it turns out that he
is a member of NICEIC and reads all their publications, and the NICEIC
apparently know nothing about the imposition next April either.

As far as costs go, they haven't figured that out yet. But I am
advised that it would have to be a minimum of 50 quid. More likely 100
quid, and if it requires a full test of the installation then there
wouldn't be change out of 200 quid. Householders are really going to
love this extra charge aren't they! And if they get a sparky in to do
the work who is qualified to issue certificates on completion then the
dear old sparky is going to ramp up his prices in the knowledge he's
now got a captive audience to squeeze the life out of.

Now get this extra info which was kindly provided to me today.
According to my source (who I consider to be very reliable given his
position in the organisation) council employees are forbidden by law
to set foot on or work on private premises, so there's no way they can
carry out these tests and certifications.

Hmm. I don't see how that can be. What about building inspectors?
He must have meant something specific.


Anyone spot a problem with these new regs yet?

If you haven't already, get cracking with letters to your MPs folks.

PoP

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

snip
According to my source (who I consider to be very reliable given his
position in the organisation) council employees are forbidden by law
to set foot on or work on private premises, so there's no way they can
carry out these tests and certifications.

I can't believe that. How do building inspectors work if they can't set foot on the premises?
Maybe" not allowed without permission"....

Hi Andy Hall
In you wrote:
According to my source (who I consider to be very reliable given his
position in the organisation) council employees are forbidden by law
to set foot on or work on private premises, so there's no way they can
carry out these tests and certifications.

Hmm. I don't see how that can be. What about building inspectors?

And Pest Control Officers, Social Workers (are they the same thing...?)

--
Fishter
unhook to mail me | http://www.fishter.org.uk/
Obsequious clod!

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 08:49:56 +0100, Fishter
wrote:

And Pest Control Officers, Social Workers (are they the same thing...?)

Since when have Social Workers controlled anything :-))

In article , Mike
Harrison wrote:
I can't believe that. How do building inspectors work if they
can't set foot on the premises? Maybe" not allowed without
permission"....

Generally of course it is by 'invitation'. But there are fallback
provisions (in the Public Health Act 1936 in my BCO days) that
enable you to get a magistrate to issue warrant to enter a property
if necessary to do your job. IIRC if access is then denied the
property owner is in contempt of court.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser
http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm

"No-one" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 08:49:56 +0100, Fishter
wrote:

And Pest Control Officers, Social Workers (are they the same thing...?)

Since when have Social Workers controlled anything :-))

I don't think they actually control the process, but I thought they had to
be consulted when matters of disabilty are concerned. They're a sort of
buffer between the "Is it really necesary" and the "It can be done with
other methods" sort of things. I know we have to consult them on things
like entry systems, and other access control methods, even for private
dwellings in which a disabled persons live and are asking for help with
payments or exemptions from. I just thought that other systems of this
nature would have to have come under their scrutiny as well.


---
www.basecuritysystems.no-ip.com

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.522 / Virus Database: 320 - Release Date: 29/09/03

I think you mean forbidden without owners permission. I believe that only
the Fire Brigade and Customs & Excise can enter a house without owners
permission and without obtaining a court order.

John


"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...

"PoP" wrote in message
...
This isn't the end of the story, just an update. Further info may
follow when I've followed up.

I have been politely pestering my MP about the new electrical regs
which are being imposed from next April, because those regs are a
threat to my business in so far that they require certification of
work, and I'm not (yet) qualified to provide that certification. That
means that for some jobs around the home where a test certificate will
need to be issued I probably won't be able to take the work on.

Just received a reply from Nick Raynsford MP (minister responsible for
this crap), c/o my MP. In this reply NR advises that if I can't do the
certificates myself there is an easy way out - call in the local
council who will do the test and issue a certificate - at a cost of
course. NR advises that householders will be happy with this
additional cost because they will be reassured that the work carried
out meets the regulations (sure they will....).

Anyway, got on the phone to the local council at the end of last week,
asking the questions "if I've got to get the local council to do this
as advised, then what is the procedure, how much does it cost, and
what is the turnaround time?".

Quick answer: "What new regulations?". More discussion follows where I
politely explain what's going on. Even quicker answer comes back:
"That's madness". Oh dear, it seems that local councils aren't happy
with what's going on in central government.

This morning I got a call from the manager of the department in the
local council that is responsible for these sorts of things. He'd been
away for a few days and was wondering what the note on his desk was
all about. I explained. His response: "Well I know there is going to
be new regs coming along in the future, but no-one has told us
anything about it being from April". Furthermore, it turns out that he
is a member of NICEIC and reads all their publications, and the NICEIC
apparently know nothing about the imposition next April either.

As far as costs go, they haven't figured that out yet. But I am
advised that it would have to be a minimum of 50 quid. More likely 100
quid, and if it requires a full test of the installation then there
wouldn't be change out of 200 quid. Householders are really going to
love this extra charge aren't they! And if they get a sparky in to do
the work who is qualified to issue certificates on completion then the
dear old sparky is going to ramp up his prices in the knowledge he's
now got a captive audience to squeeze the life out of.

Now get this extra info which was kindly provided to me today.
According to my source (who I consider to be very reliable given his
position in the organisation) council employees are forbidden by law
to set foot on or work on private premises, so there's no way they can
carry out these tests and certifications.

Anyone spot a problem with these new regs yet?

If you haven't already, get cracking with letters to your MPs folks.

PoP


Have you noticed that the NICEIC are now advertising on bus stops etc.
Probably just a coincidence.

Adam

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:49:24 +0100, "John Greenwood"
wrote:

I think you mean forbidden without owners permission. I believe that only
the Fire Brigade and Customs & Excise can enter a house without owners
permission and without obtaining a court order.

I believe there a quite a number of bodies that have a statitory right
of entry at least onto your land, depending on circumstances. One
such, IIRC, is the Ordnance Survey.

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 22:29:51 +0100, No-one
wrote:

I believe there a quite a number of bodies that have a statitory right
of entry at least onto your land, depending on circumstances. One
such, IIRC, is the Ordnance Survey.

I feel sure that in due course David Blunkett will see fit to open the
list still further.

He's already bringing in the RIP bill despite fierce opposition,
allowing a vast number of people direct access to your phone calls and
email services.

And by the looks of Blairs speech to the conference this week ID cards
will be in the Queens speech in a couple of weeks time.

Still, mustn't grumble. Living in a nanny state has its advantages.

PoP

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 06:51:57 +0100, PoP
wrote:

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 22:29:51 +0100, No-one
wrote:

I believe there a quite a number of bodies that have a statitory right
of entry at least onto your land, depending on circumstances. One
such, IIRC, is the Ordnance Survey.

I feel sure that in due course David Blunkett will see fit to open the
list still further.

He's already bringing in the RIP bill despite fierce opposition,
allowing a vast number of people direct access to your phone calls and
email services.

Which really does demonstrate that the interest is in interfering with
people's lives rather than an understanding of the technology.
Every time governments try this game, there is a simple way to
circumvent it. With email, all that is required is to have it hosted
on a server offshore and outside UK jurisdiction, and then to use
appropriate encrypted links to collect, and there is little that they
can do.


And by the looks of Blairs speech to the conference this week ID cards
will be in the Queens speech in a couple of weeks time.

Still, mustn't grumble. Living in a nanny state has its advantages.

It does?

Living here is fine, but I don't need very much from the state and
would prefer not to fund it to the extent that I do.



PoP

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 06:51:57 +0100, PoP
wrote:

He's already bringing in the RIP bill despite fierce opposition,
allowing a vast number of people direct access to your phone calls and
email services.

The RIP bill is already passed !!!!

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.

The insidious thing about this Act and many of the modern ones of the
last couple of decades is that they empower the releveant Secretary of
State to make statutory regulations which increase the scope/effect of
the primary legislation.

In article ,
Huge wrote:
Still, mustn't grumble. Living in a nanny state has its advantages.

Like what?

I'd love to know of a state that can't be referred to as 'nanny'.
Heard on the radio today that a cafe owner in Iraq was prosecuted for
'allowing' a 'boy and girl' to hold hands. Just the thing nannies might
object to...

--
*The only difference between a rut and a grave is the depth.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

On 2 Oct 2003 10:26:08 GMT, (Huge) wrote:

Still, mustn't grumble. Living in a nanny state has its advantages.

Like what?

Could you give me a couple of months? I might come up with
something.....

PoP

uk.finance + uk.politics.misc added

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:40:15 +0100, PoP
wrote:

About a new requirement from next April that all domestic electricaL
work will have to be certified by a qualified electrician.


As far as costs go, they haven't figured that out yet. But I am
advised that it would have to be a minimum of 50 quid. More likely 100
quid, and if it requires a full test of the installation then there
wouldn't be change out of 200 quid. Householders are really going to
love this extra charge aren't they! And if they get a sparky in to do
the work who is qualified to issue certificates on completion then the
dear old sparky is going to ramp up his prices in the knowledge he's
now got a captive audience to squeeze the life out of.


I was wondering where the impetus for all these new regs came from,
then it struck me:

Say..

I am a qualified electrician, Dave over the back is a professional
painter and decorator employed by his own VAT registered LTD co, as I
am.

Now, Dave could do his own house wiring, but he's not qualified and
ther's be no certificate. But anyway, if he did he wouldn't pay
any tax on it.

So Dave calls me in to fix his outside lights. I want to come out with
20 quid for doing the job. but I have to charge VATat 17.5%, pay both
halves of the NI contributions, and higher rate income tax at 40%,
plus excise duties on road fuels, council tax etc etc. The effect of
all the taxation is that Dave has to pay me £100 just to get £20 worth
of electrical work done.

Dave's tax status is exactly the same as mine so to get that £100 He
has to do £500 of decorating work. £480 of which goes to the
government.

Bearing in mind the recent beurocratic meddling and restrictions
imposed on boiler replacement, installation of double glazing, and now
house wiring, anyone here see an incentive for the goverment to make
DIY as difficult as possible?

Or have I got it wrong somewhere?

DG

In article ,
derek writes:

uk.finance + uk.politics.misc added

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:40:15 +0100, PoP
wrote:

About a new requirement from next April that all domestic electricaL
work will have to be certified by a qualified electrician.

That isn't what's proposed. It's difficult to work out what is
proposed, but it will most likely be based on being a member of
NICEIC, and nothing to do with being a qualified electrician.
The government was estimating about 40% of electricians currently
belong to electrical trade bodies, but the trade itself seems to
put the figure much lower, at little more than 25%.

I was wondering where the impetus for all these new regs came from,

The technical justification was non-existant (well, it did
exist, but it was just plain wrong, and so very obviously so).
The motivation is not a technical or safety one, although
that's what the press releases from the Office of the Deputy
Prime Minister would try and have you believe.

--
Andrew Gabriel

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 15:25:29 +0100, derek
wrote:

Bearing in mind the recent beurocratic meddling and restrictions
imposed on boiler replacement, installation of double glazing, and now
house wiring, anyone here see an incentive for the goverment to make
DIY as difficult as possible?
=20
Or have I got it wrong somewhere?

DG

I think the reason is to avoid people doing a job badly and creating a
danger.


--=20
Peter Saxton from London

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 15:25:29 +0100, derek
wrote:




I was wondering where the impetus for all these new regs came from,
then it struck me:

Say..

I am a qualified electrician, Dave over the back is a professional
painter and decorator employed by his own VAT registered LTD co, as I
am.

Now, Dave could do his own house wiring, but he's not qualified and
ther's be no certificate. But anyway, if he did he wouldn't pay
any tax on it.

So Dave calls me in to fix his outside lights. I want to come out with
20 quid for doing the job. but I have to charge VATat 17.5%, pay both
halves of the NI contributions, and higher rate income tax at 40%,
plus excise duties on road fuels, council tax etc etc. The effect of
all the taxation is that Dave has to pay me £100 just to get £20 worth
of electrical work done.

Dave's tax status is exactly the same as mine so to get that £100 He
has to do £500 of decorating work. £480 of which goes to the
government.

Bearing in mind the recent beurocratic meddling and restrictions
imposed on boiler replacement, installation of double glazing, and now
house wiring, anyone here see an incentive for the goverment to make
DIY as difficult as possible?

Or have I got it wrong somewhere?

DG

No, I think that you are on at least part of the money. You have our
pugilistic pal and his cronies to thank for that.

The excuse presented was that there would be a reduction in electrical
accidents and fires (when almost all come from portable appliances and
their wiring and not fixed wiring).

This is also part of a series of construction legislation whereby a
tradesman belonging to a specified trade organisation (according to
the discipline) can self certify his work. Of course the tradesman
does have to have been trained or have appropriate experience and be a
member of said organisation to do this. Such membership will be more
economically viable for larger firms than for a tradesman who might
work in multiple disciplines. Membership fees and other costs will
of course be passed on to the customer.

This of course creates the 21st century equivalent to the closed shop,
especially when your point about it making it much easier for
tradespeople to be tracked through said organisations.

There is as well a general impicit put down of DIY activity as well.
For example, on the web site of one of these unions in disguise, the
Institute of Plumbers, there is a put down to the effect that it's OK
to put up a few shelves but that plumbing requires a skilled and
approved tradesman. Yeah, sure.

Never mind though. In letters from the minister responsible for all
of this via their MPs, several people asking about DIY electrical work
have been told that all is OK - they can submit a Building Notice at
the local authority. One small snag. Most local authorities know
nothing about this impending legislation, have not been funded to
handle it and are not professionally equipped. Not to worry, though
- if they squeak, they will have their budget capped.

Yes of course, this is another infringement of personal freedom by the
nanny state and a not very stealthy stealth tax.



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 17:13:27 +0100, Peter Saxton
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 15:25:29 +0100, derek
wrote:

Bearing in mind the recent beurocratic meddling and restrictions
imposed on boiler replacement, installation of double glazing, and now
house wiring, anyone here see an incentive for the goverment to make
DIY as difficult as possible?

Or have I got it wrong somewhere?

DG

I think the reason is to avoid people doing a job badly and creating a
danger.


You may want to believe that if you are an Alastair Campbell fan.....

There is nothing to support this legislation based on evidence of
safety and improved standards.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

snip

Never mind though. In letters from the minister responsible for all
of this via their MPs, several people asking about DIY electrical work
have been told that all is OK - they can submit a Building Notice at
the local authority. One small snag. Most local authorities know
nothing about this impending legislation, have not been funded to
handle it and are not professionally equipped. Not to worry, though
- if they squeak, they will have their budget capped.

Second small snag - LAs are likely to charge 100 quid upwards for processing notices.

In article , Derek
wrote:
Dave's tax status is exactly the same as mine so to get that £100
He has to do £500 of decorating work. £480 of which goes to the
government.

If this is so, he doesn't need an electrical certificate - he needs
a decent accountant. We'd all like to pay less, equally there are
lots of legal ways to cut your tax bills.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 17:31:09 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 15:25:29 +0100, derek
wrote:




I was wondering where the impetus for all these new regs came from,
then it struck me:


Would someone post a URL for a fuller explanation of what is
happening?


Say..

I am a qualified electrician, Dave over the back is a professional
painter and decorator employed by his own VAT registered LTD co, as I
am.

Now, Dave could do his own house wiring, but he's not qualified and
ther's be no certificate. But anyway, if he did he wouldn't pay
any tax on it.

So Dave calls me in to fix his outside lights. I want to come out with
20 quid for doing the job. but I have to charge VATat 17.5%, pay both
halves of the NI contributions, and higher rate income tax at 40%,
plus excise duties on road fuels, council tax etc etc. The effect of
all the taxation is that Dave has to pay me £100 just to get £20 worth
of electrical work done.

Dave's tax status is exactly the same as mine so to get that £100 He
has to do £500 of decorating work. £480 of which goes to the
government.

Bearing in mind the recent beurocratic meddling and restrictions
imposed on boiler replacement, installation of double glazing, and now
house wiring, anyone here see an incentive for the goverment to make
DIY as difficult as possible?

Or have I got it wrong somewhere?

DG

No, I think that you are on at least part of the money. You have our
pugilistic pal and his cronies to thank for that.

The excuse presented was that there would be a reduction in electrical
accidents and fires (when almost all come from portable appliances and
their wiring and not fixed wiring).

This is also part of a series of construction legislation whereby a
tradesman belonging to a specified trade organisation (according to
the discipline) can self certify his work. Of course the tradesman
does have to have been trained or have appropriate experience and be a
member of said organisation to do this. Such membership will be more
economically viable for larger firms than for a tradesman who might
work in multiple disciplines. Membership fees and other costs will
of course be passed on to the customer.

This of course creates the 21st century equivalent to the closed shop,
especially when your point about it making it much easier for
tradespeople to be tracked through said organisations.

There is as well a general impicit put down of DIY activity as well.
For example, on the web site of one of these unions in disguise, the
Institute of Plumbers, there is a put down to the effect that it's OK
to put up a few shelves but that plumbing requires a skilled and
approved tradesman. Yeah, sure.

Never mind though. In letters from the minister responsible for all
of this via their MPs, several people asking about DIY electrical work
have been told that all is OK - they can submit a Building Notice at
the local authority. One small snag. Most local authorities know
nothing about this impending legislation, have not been funded to
handle it and are not professionally equipped. Not to worry, though
- if they squeak, they will have their budget capped.

Yes of course, this is another infringement of personal freedom by the
nanny state and a not very stealthy stealth tax.



.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl


--
Alan G
"The corporate life [of society] must be
subservient to the lives of the parts instead
of the lives of the parts being subservient to
the corporate life."
(Herbert Spencer)

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 18:42:06 +0100, Tony Bryer
wrote:

In article , Derek
wrote:
Dave's tax status is exactly the same as mine so to get that £100
He has to do £500 of decorating work. £480 of which goes to the
government.

If this is so, he doesn't need an electrical certificate - he needs
a decent accountant. We'd all like to pay less, equally there are
lots of legal ways to cut your tax bills.

Well spill da beenz den. How! I've already got a covenant in favour of
the local church, don't need any more of them.

The obvious option in this selected instance, bartering, is not an
option any more because of the issue of the electrical certificate.

Providing we're both paying higher rate tax (And accepting therefore
we've already had some income at lower rate) I can't see where my
calculations are wrong.

DG

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 18:53:34 +0100, AlanG wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 17:31:09 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 15:25:29 +0100, derek
wrote:




I was wondering where the impetus for all these new regs came from,
then it struck me:


Would someone post a URL for a fuller explanation of what is
happening?


Do you want the government version or the truth?


This is the government version.

http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/grou...eg_023509.hcsp


1) Check the way that the statistics have been gathered and
(mis)represented. There is little or no basis on grounds of safety
based on actual data to support this legislation

2) Note also the way that no account has been made of the opinions of
the public. Those who did bother to write to their MPs have been
ignored, very blatantly.

3) Try to work out how it might be enforced.

Then tell us your conclusions.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 17:13:27 +0100, Peter Saxton
wrote:

I think the reason is to avoid people doing a job badly and creating a
danger.

Ah, you assume that membership of some body makes one competent ? BAD
mistake - look at Corgi fitters.

Steve

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 19:10:44 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 18:53:34 +0100, AlanG wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 17:31:09 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 15:25:29 +0100, derek
wrote:




I was wondering where the impetus for all these new regs came from,
then it struck me:


Would someone post a URL for a fuller explanation of what is
happening?


Do you want the government version or the truth?


This is the government version.

http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/grou...eg_023509.hcsp


1) Check the way that the statistics have been gathered and
(mis)represented. There is little or no basis on grounds of safety
based on actual data to support this legislation

Very few incidents in view of the millions of installations

2) Note also the way that no account has been made of the opinions of
the public. Those who did bother to write to their MPs have been
ignored, very blatantly.

I'm surprised any member of the public got to hear in the first place.
This is a stitch up closed shop.

3) Try to work out how it might be enforced.

It cannot be enforced except when a house changes hands and the seller
is going to have to shell out for a gas safety certificate and an
elecrical safety certificate.

Then tell us your conclusions.


The country is getting more like ancient china every day. You are
going to need a chit to **** soon.




--
Alan G
"The corporate life [of society] must be
subservient to the lives of the parts instead
of the lives of the parts being subservient to
the corporate life."
(Herbert Spencer)

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 20:40:48 +0100, AlanG wrote:



It cannot be enforced except when a house changes hands and the seller
is going to have to shell out for a gas safety certificate and an
elecrical safety certificate.

Exactly. I suspect that that will happen and also that people will
go for regularisation certificates from building control departments
at local authorities.

From a quick scan at a few local authority web sites, it appears that
a regularisation fee is the same as a building notice fee and that the
first does not carry VAT whereas the second does. Ergo, it would
appear to cheaper to do nothing at the outset and apply for
regularisation later.





Then tell us your conclusions.


The country is getting more like ancient china every day. You are
going to need a chit to **** soon.

Quite.



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"AlanG" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 19:10:44 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 18:53:34 +0100, AlanG wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 17:31:09 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 15:25:29 +0100, derek
wrote:




I was wondering where the impetus for all these new regs came from,
then it struck me:


Would someone post a URL for a fuller explanation of what is
happening?


Do you want the government version or the truth?


This is the government version.


http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/grou...s/page/odpm_br
eg_023509.hcsp


1) Check the way that the statistics have been gathered and
(mis)represented. There is little or no basis on grounds of safety
based on actual data to support this legislation

Very few incidents in view of the millions of installations

2) Note also the way that no account has been made of the opinions of
the public. Those who did bother to write to their MPs have been
ignored, very blatantly.

I'm surprised any member of the public got to hear in the first place.
This is a stitch up closed shop.

3) Try to work out how it might be enforced.

It cannot be enforced except when a house changes hands and the seller
is going to have to shell out for a gas safety certificate and an
elecrical safety certificate.

Then tell us your conclusions.


The country is getting more like ancient china every day. You are
going to need a chit to **** soon.


The country under this fascist dictatorial regime is now becoming well
beyond a joke. If any
f......g government jobsworth tries to enter my house and dictate to me what
I can or cannot do in my own home, he'll be leaving on a stretcher!




--
Alan G
"The corporate life [of society] must be
subservient to the lives of the parts instead
of the lives of the parts being subservient to
the corporate life."
(Herbert Spencer)

In article ,
Orange wrote:
The country under this fascist dictatorial regime is now becoming well
beyond a joke. If any
f......g government jobsworth tries to enter my house and dictate to me
what I can or cannot do in my own home, he'll be leaving on a stretcher!

Carry on beating your wife and children, then.

--
*Horn broken. - Watch for finger.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In uk.politics.misc on Fri, 3 Oct 2003 at 15:25:29, derek wrote :

uk.finance + uk.politics.misc added

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:40:15 +0100, PoP
wrote:

About a new requirement from next April that all domestic electricaL
work will have to be certified by a qualified electrician.

So if I change a plug, or replace a fuse, I'll have to call someone in?

Yeah, right - like that's gonna happen!
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham, England

"Dave Plowman" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Orange wrote:
The country under this fascist dictatorial regime is now becoming well
beyond a joke. If any
f......g government jobsworth tries to enter my house and dictate to me
what I can or cannot do in my own home, he'll be leaving on a stretcher!

Carry on beating your wife and children, then.

No Dave, my rage has got absolutely nothing to do with the way I conduct
myself towards my family, along with millions of others it's directed
against this government, who on an almost daily basis appear to have an
agenda of introducing rules and regulations affecting ordinary decent
law-abiding people, most of whom are pefectly content to be left alone to
get on with their lives.



--
*Horn broken. - Watch for finger.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 09:18:24 +0100, Vidcapper
wrote:

In uk.politics.misc on Fri, 3 Oct 2003 at 15:25:29, derek wrote :

uk.finance + uk.politics.misc added

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:40:15 +0100, PoP
wrote:

About a new requirement from next April that all domestic electricaL
work will have to be certified by a qualified electrician.

So if I change a plug, or replace a fuse, I'll have to call someone in?

Yeah, right - like that's gonna happen!

No, but almost. Read the notes on the ODPM web site in the building
regulations area.
..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On 3 Oct 2003 20:58:19 GMT, (Huge) wrote:

Steve writes:
On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 17:13:27 +0100, Peter Saxton
wrote:

I think the reason is to avoid people doing a job badly and creating a
danger.

Ah, you assume that membership of some body makes one competent ? BAD
mistake - look at Corgi fitters.

So, what do I need to stock up on before the regs come in?

I think that the reality is that most people will carry on as before
and in the event that they sell the property, pay for an inspection,
which they would have to do anyway.

The other scenario may be when other notifiable work is done, that
this could be included in a BR application.



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

In article ,
Orange wrote:
No Dave, my rage has got absolutely nothing to do with the way I conduct
myself towards my family, along with millions of others it's directed
against this government, who on an almost daily basis appear to have an
agenda of introducing rules and regulations affecting ordinary decent
law-abiding people, most of whom are pefectly content to be left alone to
get on with their lives.

You have a short memory if you think it is only this government that does
this. They all need to control the population - it's what they do.

--
*Nostalgia isn't what is used to be.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

"derek" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 18:42:06 +0100, Tony Bryer
wrote:

In article , Derek
wrote:
Dave's tax status is exactly the same as mine so to get that £100
He has to do £500 of decorating work. £480 of which goes to the
government.

If this is so, he doesn't need an electrical certificate - he needs
a decent accountant. We'd all like to pay less, equally there are
lots of legal ways to cut your tax bills.

Well spill da beenz den. How! I've already got a covenant in favour of
the local church, don't need any more of them.


Home office, dividends to wife, parents/children.


The obvious option in this selected instance, bartering, is not an
option any more because of the issue of the electrical certificate.


Why can't you still barter?

Providing we're both paying higher rate tax (And accepting therefore
we've already had some income at lower rate) I can't see where my
calculations are wrong.


Even with full VAT + higher rate + NI. I make the tax mans cut of every
additional £1 earnt only 55.5%.

The current government is based from top to bottom on lies and deception
(mainly to avoid the impractical laws they introduce) why don't you just
copy their example and do what you have always done.

On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 10:31:04 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

I think that the reality is that most people will carry on as before
and in the event that they sell the property, pay for an inspection,
which they would have to do anyway.

The possible issue with this could that if the work carried out was
not up to certification standards and material or life was lost before
it was eventually certified, the person carrying out the work would
most likely be sued and their professional indemnity insurance would
most likely not cover them. That could happen now without the new
regs, but with the new regs the certification should be carried out at
the point of installation, not some indeterminate time later.

And what about a situation where some work was carried out and not
certified, and someone else comes along and bodges a change from which
loss results? If the initial changes weren't certified then the
practitioner may well find himself facing a charge due to someone
elses poor work. Again, could happen now.

I see some good in these new requirements in so far that if the
standard 16th edition tests are carried out then the likelihood is
that the installation is safe, and certificated as such.

The bit I do not like about these new regulations (and which I
continue to badger government about) is the notion that you have to be
NICEIC registered in order to prove you can write certificates. I'm
going to college in the new year to do the C&G2391 course which will
provide me with the knowledge to perform the tests. From that (and
using the approved test equipment) I could most likely write valid
certificates. But those certificates would be meaningless unless I
were an NICEIC member.

This is like saying to someone that they have just passed their
driving test but they aren't allowed on the road until they have
gained their AA membership. The bit that government can't grasp is
that NICEIC membership does not equate to improved safety.

PoP

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 18:32:35 +0100, Mike Harrison
wrote:

Second small snag - LAs are likely to charge 100 quid upwards for processing notices.

Furhter info available on that.

I spoke with the building control manager of our local council about
this a couple of days ago. He and his department will be responsible
for carrying out these tests. And he wasn't aware that from next April
this is going to land on his plate.

Re costs, he wasn't able to give exact guidance but did say that for
carrying out window inspections the standard cost is £70. If the
electrical inspection is broadly the same amount of work then that's
what the bill is likely to be. However I intimated that perhaps the
testing might have to be more thorough and take more time - and he
didn't flinch when I said maybe the bill would be £250 or more.

So I carry out a general DIY type job for a householder to fit a new
light fitting and charge him £30 for the job. Then the council come
along and stiff the householder for another £250. If it weren't for
the requirement to be an NICEIC member I might have been able to carry
out those tests and issue a certificate for an all in cost of say £40
(a £10 uplift - I'm already on-site so no call-out charge to issue the
certificate). So the householder will get badly stiffed by this new
legislation.

PoP

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 10:51:37 +0100, "Frank X"
wrote:

Home office, dividends to wife, parents/children.

Home office - the local government can charge you the uniform business
rate for use of home or part thereof as business premises, because you
fall into the business rate arrangement which shopkeepers and others
have to dedicate some of their money to. That legislation is there
already:

http://www.local.dtlr.gov.uk/finance...s/guide/02.htm

Dividends to wife, parents/children - haven't you heard about S660?
With that power (which has been on the statute books since 1936) the
Inland Revenue can (and have recently) pretend that the income
actually belongs to the worker and not those to whom it was paid.
Result is a backdated tax bill for the individual with several 0's on
the back end.

IT contractors have been particularly badly hit with S660, one example
recently put the tax bill at £42,000 owed. Check the following story:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2988881.stm

and

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2829781.stm

PoP