Hi,

I've been following the threads on here regarding Part P and its effects on
DIY work on-and-off since late 2002, and I thought I now understood exactly
what the situation was.

But today on the Rospa site I see the following unqualified statement:

quote
Notification will not be required if –
*....
*...

* DIY work that follows the IEE guidance or that in the listed DIY
manuals based on BS 7671 and IEE.
/quote

(http://www.rospa.org.uk/productsafet...electrical.htm,
section 3.2.5 )

Is this correct? This would imply that one **can** do major works as long as
7671 is followed.

Comments anyone ?

p.s. As it is a topic that has been done over and over, an I propose Part P
and electrical DIY as an addition to the FAQ?


"coherers"

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:05:16 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:

Hi,

I've been following the threads on here regarding Part P and its effects on
DIY work on-and-off since late 2002, and I thought I now understood exactly
what the situation was.

But today on the Rospa site I see the following unqualified statement:

quote
Notification will not be required if –
*....
*...

* DIY work that follows the IEE guidance or that in the listed DIY
manuals based on BS 7671 and IEE.
/quote

(http://www.rospa.org.uk/productsafet...electrical.htm,
section 3.2.5 )

Is this correct? This would imply that one **can** do major works as long as
7671 is followed.

Comments anyone ?


I don't think that this is correct. They seem to have confused
standards for the work with what is and what isn't controlled.

Have a look at

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20041808.htm





--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Andy Hall wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:05:16 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:

quote
Notification will not be required if ?
*....
*...

* DIY work that follows the IEE guidance or that in the listed DIY
manuals based on BS 7671 and IEE.
/quote

(http://www.rospa.org.uk/productsafet...electrical.htm,
section 3.2.5 )

Is this correct? This would imply that one **can** do major works as long as
7671 is followed.

Comments anyone ?


I don't think that this is correct. They seem to have confused
standards for the work with what is and what isn't controlled.

Have a look at

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20041808.htm

However it will be a wonderful resource to reference when someone asks
why some work hasn't had building regs. approval! :-)

--
Chris Green

On 23 Nov 2004 13:11:01 GMT, wrote:

Andy Hall wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:05:16 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:

quote
Notification will not be required if ?
*....
*...

* DIY work that follows the IEE guidance or that in the listed DIY
manuals based on BS 7671 and IEE.
/quote

(http://www.rospa.org.uk/productsafet...electrical.htm,
section 3.2.5 )

Is this correct? This would imply that one **can** do major works as long as
7671 is followed.

Comments anyone ?


I don't think that this is correct. They seem to have confused
standards for the work with what is and what isn't controlled.

Have a look at

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20041808.htm

However it will be a wonderful resource to reference when someone asks
why some work hasn't had building regs. approval! :-)


There's a thought. Better archive it before they correct it.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:05:16 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:

Hi,

I've been following the threads on here regarding Part P and its effects
on
DIY work on-and-off since late 2002, and I thought I now understood
exactly
what the situation was.

But today on the Rospa site I see the following unqualified statement:

quote
Notification will not be required if -
*....
*...

* DIY work that follows the IEE guidance or that in the listed
DIY
manuals based on BS 7671 and IEE.
/quote

(http://www.rospa.org.uk/productsafet...electrical.htm,
section 3.2.5 )

Is this correct? This would imply that one **can** do major works as long
as
7671 is followed.

Comments anyone ?

I don't think that this is correct.

It is correct. That is what it says.

They seem to have confused
standards for the work with what is and what isn't controlled.

Have a look at

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20041808.htm

And where does that negate the above?

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:55:54 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:05:16 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:

Hi,

I've been following the threads on here regarding Part P and its effects
on
DIY work on-and-off since late 2002, and I thought I now understood
exactly
what the situation was.

But today on the Rospa site I see the following unqualified statement:

quote
Notification will not be required if -
*....
*...

* DIY work that follows the IEE guidance or that in the listed
DIY
manuals based on BS 7671 and IEE.
/quote

(http://www.rospa.org.uk/productsafet...electrical.htm,
section 3.2.5 )

Is this correct? This would imply that one **can** do major works as long
as
7671 is followed.

Comments anyone ?

I don't think that this is correct.

It is correct. That is what it says.

Do you believe everything you read on web sites?



They seem to have confused
standards for the work with what is and what isn't controlled.

Have a look at

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20041808.htm

And where does that negate the above?


Look at Part P of Schedule 1 and Schedule 2B near the bottom.

The Schedule 1 piece gives the scope of where electrical work is
controlled. This is in a dwelling and buildings associated with or
supplied from it.

Schedule 2B lists exemptions.

DIY work following BS7671 is not exempted.

I've emailed ROSPA and asked them to check their information.





--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
Look at Part P of Schedule 1 and Schedule 2B near the bottom.

The Schedule 1 piece gives the scope of where electrical work is
controlled. This is in a dwelling and buildings associated with or
supplied from it.

Schedule 2B lists exemptions.

DIY work following BS7671 is not exempted.

" SCHEDULE 2B

Regulation 12(5)

DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK WHERE NO BUILDING NOTICE OR DEPOSIT OF FULL PLANS
REQUIRED

1. Work consisting of -

(a) replacing any socket-outlet, control switch or ceiling rose;

[does not say that you cannot touch the ring main]

(b) replacing a damaged cable for a single circuit only;

[so you can replace the ring main or a radial circuit]

(c) re-fixing or replacing enclosures of existing installation components,
where the circuit protective measures are unaffected;

(d) providing mechanical protection to an existing fixed installation, where
the circuit protective measures and current carrying capacity of conductors
are unaffected by the increased thermal insulation.

2. Work which -

Work which -

(a) is not in a kitchen, or a special location,

(b) does not involve work on a special installation, and

[So the above two say any work as long as it is not in a kitchen or a
"special installation"]

(c) consists of -

(i) adding light fittings and switches to an existing circuit;

(ii) adding socket outlets and fused spurs to an existing ring or radial
circuit; or

[So if you leave 1 foot od each of the two wores comming for the 30 amp fuse
from the CU you can do anything. The circuit is existing and sockets and
fused spurs added.]

(iii) installing or upgrading main or supplementary equipotential bonding.

3. In paragraph 2 -

"special installation" means:

- an electric floor
- ceiling heating system,
- garden lighting
- electric power installation,

[what does this mean?]

- an electricity generator
- an extra-low voltage lighting system which is not a pre-assembled lighting
set bearing the CE marking referred to in regulation 9 of the Electrical
Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994[8];

[what is "extra low voltage"? So this appears to mean you can install 12v
downlighters and run the cables]

"special location" means a location within the limits of the relevant zones
specified for a bath, a shower, a swimming or paddling pool or a hot air
sauna in the Wiring Regulations, sixteenth edition, published by the
Institution of Electrical Engineers and the British Standards Institution as
BS 7671: 2001 and incorporating amendments 1 and 2.".
[so can't fix electrical equipment "near" a bath, shower, pools& sauna.]

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:58:56 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
Look at Part P of Schedule 1 and Schedule 2B near the bottom.

The Schedule 1 piece gives the scope of where electrical work is
controlled. This is in a dwelling and buildings associated with or
supplied from it.

Schedule 2B lists exemptions.

DIY work following BS7671 is not exempted.

" SCHEDULE 2B

Regulation 12(5)

DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK WHERE NO BUILDING NOTICE OR DEPOSIT OF FULL PLANS
REQUIRED

1. Work consisting of -

(a) replacing any socket-outlet, control switch or ceiling rose;

[does not say that you cannot touch the ring main]

You are looking at it the wrong way round.

These are *exemptions*.

Other works are controlled.


(b) replacing a damaged cable for a single circuit only;

[so you can replace the ring main or a radial circuit]

No.



(c) re-fixing or replacing enclosures of existing installation components,
where the circuit protective measures are unaffected;

(d) providing mechanical protection to an existing fixed installation, where
the circuit protective measures and current carrying capacity of conductors
are unaffected by the increased thermal insulation.

2. Work which -

Work which -

(a) is not in a kitchen, or a special location,

(b) does not involve work on a special installation, and

[So the above two say any work as long as it is not in a kitchen or a
"special installation"]

No. You haven't read it correctly. The *and* at the end of (b)
means that conditions (a) (b) *and* (c) have to apply.



(c) consists of -

(i) adding light fittings and switches to an existing circuit;

(ii) adding socket outlets and fused spurs to an existing ring or radial
circuit; or

[So if you leave 1 foot od each of the two wores comming for the 30 amp fuse
from the CU you can do anything. The circuit is existing and sockets and
fused spurs added.]

The legislation would appear to leave that loophole.



(iii) installing or upgrading main or supplementary equipotential bonding.

3. In paragraph 2 -

"special installation" means:

- an electric floor
- ceiling heating system,
- garden lighting
- electric power installation,

[what does this mean?]

It isn;t a bulletted list

"special installation" means an electric floor or ceiling heating
system, a garden lighting or electric power installation, an
electricity generator, or an extra-low voltage lighting system which
is not a pre-assembled lighting set bearing the CE marking referred to
in regulation 9 of the Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations
1994[8]


- an electricity generator
- an extra-low voltage lighting system which is not a pre-assembled lighting
set bearing the CE marking referred to in regulation 9 of the Electrical
Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994[8];

[what is "extra low voltage"? So this appears to mean you can install 12v
downlighters and run the cables]

Less than 50v AC or 120v DC



"special location" means a location within the limits of the relevant zones
specified for a bath, a shower, a swimming or paddling pool or a hot air
sauna in the Wiring Regulations, sixteenth edition, published by the
Institution of Electrical Engineers and the British Standards Institution as
BS 7671: 2001 and incorporating amendments 1 and 2.".
[so can't fix electrical equipment "near" a bath, shower, pools& sauna.]




--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

(ii) adding socket outlets and fused spurs to an existing ring or radial
circuit; or

Yet another reason to standardise on 20 amp MCB, 2.5sq mmm radial
circuits, you can expand them as much as you like without requiring
building regs approval.

Although reading that it would appear to effectively include any
modification of a ring too, it depends on one's interpretation.

--
Chris Green

Andy Hall wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:05:16 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:


Hi,

I've been following the threads on here regarding Part P and its effects on
DIY work on-and-off since late 2002, and I thought I now understood exactly
what the situation was.

But today on the Rospa site I see the following unqualified statement:

quote
Notification will not be required if –
*....
*...

* DIY work that follows the IEE guidance or that in the listed DIY
manuals based on BS 7671 and IEE.
/quote

(http://www.rospa.org.uk/productsafet...electrical.htm,
section 3.2.5 )

Is this correct? This would imply that one **can** do major works as long as
7671 is followed.

Comments anyone ?



I don't think that this is correct. They seem to have confused
standards for the work with what is and what isn't controlled.

Have a look at

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20041808.htm






From the link you gave Andy:


DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK WHERE NO BUILDING NOTICE OR DEPOSIT OF FULL PLANS
REQUIRED

Work which -

(a) is not in a kitchen, or a special location,

(b) does not involve work on a special installation, and

(c) consists of -

(i) adding light fittings and switches to an existing circuit;

(ii) adding socket outlets and fused spurs to an existing
ring or radial circuit; or

(iii) installing or upgrading main or supplementary
equipotential bonding.


I thought adding socket outlets and spurs was not allowed under the new
regs, but this says otherwise. Except for a kitchen.


Steve

"Steve Jones" wrote in message
...
Andy Hall wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:05:16 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:


Hi,

I've been following the threads on here regarding Part P and its effects
on
DIY work on-and-off since late 2002, and I thought I now understood
exactly
what the situation was.

But today on the Rospa site I see the following unqualified statement:

quote
Notification will not be required if –
*....
*...

* DIY work that follows the IEE guidance or that in the listed
DIY
manuals based on BS 7671 and IEE.
/quote

(http://www.rospa.org.uk/productsafet...electrical.htm,
section 3.2.5 )

Is this correct? This would imply that one **can** do major works as
long as
7671 is followed.

Comments anyone ?



I don't think that this is correct. They seem to have confused
standards for the work with what is and what isn't controlled.

Have a look at

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20041808.htm

From the link you gave Andy:


DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK WHERE NO
BUILDING NOTICE OR DEPOSIT OF FULL PLANS
REQUIRED

Work which -

(a) is not in a kitchen, or a special location,

"special location"? What is that?

(b) does not involve work on a special installation, and

So the above two say any work as long as it is not in a kitchen or a
"special installation" (whatever that is)

(c) consists of -

(i) adding light fittings and switches to an existing circuit;

(ii) adding socket outlets and fused
spurs to an existing ring or radial circuit; or

So if you leave 1 foot od each of the two wores comming for the 30 amp fuse
from the CU you can do anything. The circuit is existing and sockets and
fused spurs added.

(iii) installing or upgrading main or
supplementary equipotential bonding.

I thought adding socket outlets and spurs was not allowed under the new
regs, but this says otherwise. Except for a kitchen.

Yep. You are right. So anything goes as long as it is not in a kitchen or
"special location", whatever that is.

I can see why they homed in on kitchen. This is to prevent cowboy kitchen
fitters slapping cables all around the place. That MPs daughter who died
probably prompted this.

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:34:45 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Steve Jones" wrote in message

From the link you gave Andy:


DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK WHERE NO
BUILDING NOTICE OR DEPOSIT OF FULL PLANS
REQUIRED

Work which -

(a) is not in a kitchen, or a special location,

"special location"? What is that?

From the SI:


"special location" means a location within the limits of the relevant
zones specified for a bath, a shower, a swimming or paddling pool or a
hot air sauna in the Wiring Regulations, sixteenth edition, published
by the Institution of Electrical Engineers and the British Standards
Institution as BS 7671: 2001 and incorporating amendments 1 and 2.".






(b) does not involve work on a special installation, and

So the above two say any work as long as it is not in a kitchen or a
"special installation" (whatever that is)

No they don't. The word "and" is important here. For exemption,
conditions (a), (b) *and* (c) must apply.



(c) consists of -

(i) adding light fittings and switches to an existing circuit;

(ii) adding socket outlets and fused
spurs to an existing ring or radial circuit; or

So if you leave 1 foot od each of the two wores comming for the 30 amp fuse
from the CU you can do anything. The circuit is existing and sockets and
fused spurs added.

This would appear to meet the letter of the legislation.

We had a thread a while back where somebody suggested putting looped
circuits into a CU for this reason.

It is one more reason why the whole thing, like most of this kind of
legislation, is a nonsense.




(iii) installing or upgrading main or
supplementary equipotential bonding.

I thought adding socket outlets and spurs was not allowed under the new
regs, but this says otherwise. Except for a kitchen.

Yep. You are right. So anything goes as long as it is not in a kitchen or
"special location", whatever that is.

I can see why they homed in on kitchen. This is to prevent cowboy kitchen
fitters slapping cables all around the place. That MPs daughter who died
probably prompted this.

Entirely possible but completely flawed.




--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:34:45 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Steve Jones" wrote in message

From the link you gave Andy:


DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK WHERE NO
BUILDING NOTICE OR DEPOSIT OF FULL PLANS
REQUIRED

Work which -

(a) is not in a kitchen, or a special location,

"special location"? What is that?

From the SI:


"special location" means a location within the limits of the relevant
zones specified for a bath, a shower, a swimming or paddling pool or a
hot air sauna in the Wiring Regulations, sixteenth edition, published
by the Institution of Electrical Engineers and the British Standards
Institution as BS 7671: 2001 and incorporating amendments 1 and 2.".

(b) does not involve work on a special installation, and

So the above two say any work as long as it is not in a kitchen or a
"special installation" (whatever that is)

No they don't. The word "and" is important here. For exemption,
conditions (a), (b) *and* (c) must apply.



(c) consists of -

(i) adding light fittings and switches to an existing circuit;

(ii) adding socket outlets and fused
spurs to an existing ring or radial circuit; or

So if you leave 1 foot od each of the two wores comming for the 30 amp
fuse
from the CU you can do anything. The circuit is existing and sockets and
fused spurs added.

This would appear to meet the letter of the legislation.

We had a thread a while back where somebody suggested putting looped
circuits into a CU for this reason.

You could fill all the spare breaker slots on the CU and have two 1 metre
lengths going onto one socket near the CU. then that is a "circuit".

You can totally replace an existing ring main if it is defective. So you
can redirect an existing ring main right back to the CU breaker as it was
"defective".

It is one more reason why the whole thing, like most of this kind of
legislation, is a nonsense.

(iii) installing or upgrading main or
supplementary equipotential bonding.

I thought adding socket outlets and spurs was not allowed under the new
regs, but this says otherwise. Except for a kitchen.

Yep. You are right. So anything goes as long as it is not in a kitchen
or
"special location", whatever that is.

I can see why they homed in on kitchen. This is to prevent cowboy kitchen
fitters slapping cables all around the place. That MPs daughter who died
probably prompted this.

Entirely possible but completely flawed.

Now where are the regs that say a replacement cylinder needs the BCO
involved?

Andy Hall wrote:


"special location", whatever that is.

I can see why they homed in on kitchen. This is to prevent cowboy kitchen
fitters slapping cables all around the place. That MPs daughter who died
probably prompted this.


Entirely possible but completely flawed.

Not in the commonly accepted models of causation at the gross material
(non-quantum) level - the Part P proposals and basic drafting were
completed long before the Darwinian incident you mention, no?

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:19:02 +0000, Steve Jones
wrote:



From the link you gave Andy:


DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK WHERE NO BUILDING NOTICE OR DEPOSIT OF FULL PLANS
REQUIRED

Work which -

(a) is not in a kitchen, or a special location,

(b) does not involve work on a special installation, and

(c) consists of -

(i) adding light fittings and switches to an existing circuit;

(ii) adding socket outlets and fused spurs to an existing
ring or radial circuit; or

(iii) installing or upgrading main or supplementary
equipotential bonding.


I thought adding socket outlets and spurs was not allowed under the new
regs, but this says otherwise. Except for a kitchen.


You can because they are considered to be a minor work.

Whether or not this makes any sense is another issue.

As far as I am concerned, If somebody is competent (or not) to add a
spur or socket then I see no real reason why they can't add a circuit
from the competence perspective.

It's just as easy to get into trouble installing a spur as it is a
circuit.

For example, cable of inadequate size could be used, or people could
add a spur to the end of a spur from a ring circuit.

Exempting equipotential bonding is curious as well. It's an imprtant
safety mechanism and should also be tested.

The exemptions seem much more arbitrary than considered, especially
when there isn't a problem to address in the first place.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Well this is good news, Part P doesn't seem so restrictive after all. I
was under the impression that changing cracked socket/light/ceiling
fittings was about all you could do.

The exemptions seem much more arbitrary than considered, especially
when there isn't a problem to address in the first place.

Should we have expected anything else!


Steve

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:52:43 +0000, Steve Jones
wrote:

Well this is good news, Part P doesn't seem so restrictive after all. I
was under the impression that changing cracked socket/light/ceiling
fittings was about all you could do.

The exemptions seem much more arbitrary than considered, especially
when there isn't a problem to address in the first place.

Should we have expected anything else!

It;s better, but not usefully better.

If you're an idiot you can still get into trouble and if you are
competent, it's stupidly restrictive.

Now where was my hunting horn?




--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:19:02 +0000, Steve Jones
wrote:



From the link you gave Andy:


DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK WHERE NO BUILDING NOTICE OR DEPOSIT OF FULL PLANS
REQUIRED

Work which -

(a) is not in a kitchen, or a special location,

(b) does not involve work on a special installation, and

(c) consists of -

(i) adding light fittings and switches to an existing
circuit;

(ii) adding socket outlets and fused spurs to an existing
ring or radial circuit; or

(iii) installing or upgrading main or supplementary
equipotential bonding.


I thought adding socket outlets and spurs was not allowed under the new
regs, but this says otherwise. Except for a kitchen.


You can because they are considered to be a minor work.

Whether or not this makes any sense is another issue.

As far as I am concerned, If somebody is competent (or not) to add a
spur or socket then I see no real reason why they can't add a circuit
from the competence perspective.

It's just as easy to get into trouble installing a spur as it is a
circuit.

For example, cable of inadequate size could be used, or people could
add a spur to the end of a spur from a ring circuit.

Exempting equipotential bonding is curious as well. It's an imprtant
safety mechanism and should also be tested.

This does not have to be connected to the electrical system.

The exemptions seem much more arbitrary than considered, especially
when there isn't a problem to address in the first place.



--

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:00:15 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:19:02 +0000, Steve Jones
wrote:



Exempting equipotential bonding is curious as well. It's an imprtant
safety mechanism and should also be tested.

This does not have to be connected to the electrical system.


It is part of the electrical system in that if absent there is an
increased risk of shock and other issues.

Just because something is not normally current carrying doesn't mean
that it's unimportant.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Exempting equipotential bonding is curious as well. It's an imprtant
safety mechanism and should also be tested.

Isn't this so that plumbers don't need to jump through the hoops when doing pipework that needs
earthing ?

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:52:59 GMT, Mike Harrison
wrote:

Exempting equipotential bonding is curious as well. It's an imprtant
safety mechanism and should also be tested.

Isn't this so that plumbers don't need to jump through the hoops when doing pipework that needs
earthing ?

Possibly. There is a new mediaeval guild/income tax net for
plumbers.

My point was really that service and equipotential bonding is an
important safety feature so it is surprising that it is exempted.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Andy Hall wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:05:16 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:


Hi,

I've been following the threads on here regarding Part P and its effects on
DIY work on-and-off since late 2002, and I thought I now understood exactly
what the situation was.

But today on the Rospa site I see the following unqualified statement:

quote
Notification will not be required if –
*....
*...

* DIY work that follows the IEE guidance or that in the listed DIY
manuals based on BS 7671 and IEE.
/quote

(http://www.rospa.org.uk/productsafet...electrical.htm,
section 3.2.5 )

Is this correct? This would imply that one **can** do major works as long as
7671 is followed.

Comments anyone ?



I don't think that this is correct. They seem to have confused
standards for the work with what is and what isn't controlled.

Have a look at

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20041808.htm






From the link you gave Andy it states:


DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK WHERE NO BUILDING NOTICE OR DEPOSIT OF FULL PLANS
REQUIRED

Work which -

(a) is not in a kitchen, or a special location,

(b) does not involve work on a special installation, and

(c) consists of -

(i) adding light fittings and switches to an existing circuit;

(ii) adding socket outlets and fused spurs to an existing
ring or radial circuit; or

(iii) installing or upgrading main or supplementary
equipotential bonding.


I thought adding new socket outlets and spurs was not allowed under the
new regs, but this says otherwise. Except for a kitchen.


Steve

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:05:16 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:

quote
Notification will not be required if -
*....
*...

* DIY work that follows the IEE guidance or that in the listed
DIY
manuals based on BS 7671 and IEE.
/quote

(http://www.rospa.org.uk/productsafet...electrical.htm,
section 3.2.5 )


I don't think that this is correct. They seem to have confused
standards for the work with what is and what isn't controlled.

Have a look at

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20041808.htm
.andy


Thanks Andy.

Having taken a look at this, Part P and other postings, I am now sure it is
wrong.

Further, it now seems clear to me that **all** domestic electrical works are
covered by Building Regs.

The exemptions appear to be about notification, not about whether it is
covered by the Regs or not. The title of Schedule 2B is "DESCRIPTIONS OF
WORK WHERE NO BUILDING NOTICE OR DEPOSIT OF FULL PLANS REQUIRED"

The only exempt works are described in the "Limits of Application" column of
amendments to Schedule 1 - i.e.:
quote
The requirements of this Part apply only to electrical installations that
are intended to operate at low or extra-low voltage and are -


(a) in a dwelling;

(b) in the common parts of a building serving one or more dwellings, but
excluding power supplies to lifts;

(c) in a building that receives its electricity from a source located within
or shared with a dwelling; and

(d) in a garden or in or on land associated with a building where the
electricity is from a source located within or shared with a dwelling.
/quote

Everything else is covered by the regs, but not all works require
notification.

The Part P Approved Document seems to take that view. From section 0.8
quote
When the non-notifiable work
described in Table 1 [i.e Schedule 2B] is to be
undertaken by a DIY worker, a
way of showing compliance would
be to follow the IEE guidance or
guidance in other authoritative
manuals that are based on this,
and to have a competent person
inspect and test the work and
supply a Minor Electrical
Installation Works Certificate. The
competent person need not
necessarily be registered with an
electrical self-certification scheme
but, as required by BS 7671, must
be competent in respect of the
inspection and testing of an
installation
/quote

Note the use of the word "compliance". The regs apply even for minor DIY.So
if we don't want to get a certified "professional" to check our stuff, we
will have to do ourselves certificates !

"coherers"

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:29:30 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:




Everything else is covered by the regs, but not all works require
notification.

The Part P Approved Document seems to take that view. From section 0.8
quote
When the non-notifiable work
described in Table 1 [i.e Schedule 2B] is to be
undertaken by a DIY worker, a
way of showing compliance would
be to follow the IEE guidance or
guidance in other authoritative
manuals that are based on this,
and to have a competent person
inspect and test the work and
supply a Minor Electrical
Installation Works Certificate. The
competent person need not
necessarily be registered with an
electrical self-certification scheme
but, as required by BS 7671, must
be competent in respect of the
inspection and testing of an
installation
/quote

Note the use of the word "compliance". The regs apply even for minor DIY.So
if we don't want to get a certified "professional" to check our stuff, we
will have to do ourselves certificates !

This is as I understand it, but do remember that the Approved
Documents do not have the force of law - they are simply a guideline.

So the quote above can be nothing more than a recommendation, and is
in effect the status quo today.




"coherers"




--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:29:30 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:

The Part P Approved Document seems to take that view. From section 0.8
quote
When the non-notifiable work
described in Table 1 [i.e Schedule 2B] is to be
undertaken by a DIY worker, a
way of showing compliance would
be to follow the IEE guidance or
guidance in other authoritative
manuals that are based on this,
and to have a competent person
inspect and test the work and
supply a Minor Electrical
Installation Works Certificate. The
competent person need not
necessarily be registered with an
electrical self-certification scheme
but, as required by BS 7671, must
be competent in respect of the
inspection and testing of an
installation
/quote

Note the use of the word "compliance". The regs apply even for minor
DIY.So
if we don't want to get a certified "professional" to check our stuff, we
will have to do ourselves certificates !

This is as I understand it, but do remember that the Approved
Documents do not have the force of law - they are simply a guideline.

Right - there is a tendency for the Approved documents to "extend" the law,
which really irritates me 'cos there are enough real regulations without
f***head's office inventing them

So the quote above can be nothing more than a recommendation, and is
in effect the status quo today.

There is one big change in the status quo. Currently, if we add a socket and
skimp on the inspection/testing, we may end on the wrong side of the civil
law. After 1st Jan, if we do anything which doesn't comply with regs, we
could end up with a criminal record ( s35, Building Act 1984).

Ditto for the professionals though, which might be the silver lining....

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:10:41 GMT, "coherers"
wrote:

"Andy Hall" wrote in message

This is as I understand it, but do remember that the Approved
Documents do not have the force of law - they are simply a guideline.

Right - there is a tendency for the Approved documents to "extend" the law,
which really irritates me 'cos there are enough real regulations without
f***head's office inventing them

So the quote above can be nothing more than a recommendation, and is
in effect the status quo today.

There is one big change in the status quo. Currently, if we add a socket and
skimp on the inspection/testing, we may end on the wrong side of the civil
law. After 1st Jan, if we do anything which doesn't comply with regs, we
could end up with a criminal record ( s35, Building Act 1984).

Ditto for the professionals though, which might be the silver lining....


True. Although I suspect in reality that the whole thing will end up
being a white elephant anyway.

Our resident ex and current BCOs might like to comment here, but it
seems to me that the only time where violations of building control
are likely to be detected are

a) If they are visible from the exterior of the house - e.g. an
extension

b) The neighbours shop the householder

c) Something bad happens

d) The property is sold.


For wiring, a) and b) are unlikely if it is the only work - of course
if it's part of something else then that's a bigger issue and the
person is already in violation of other parts anyway.

c) is possible, but we know that the number of bad things like fires
and shocks attributable to fixed wiring are small. Since this
regulation allows spurs to be fitted uncontrolled, it does not protect
the MP's electrocuted daughter if the cooker hood wiring was to a
spur, except in so far that it was in a kitchen and therefore
controlled. I see no logical reason why the same thing with a
different appliance couldn't have happened in another room.

In case d) what would happen? The purchaser has a survey and the
surveyor picks up that wiring was done and no certificate because it
was DIY and the person didn't bother. So he gets an electrician in
and the installation is tested. If it passes then fine, if not then
it gets fixed. I don't imagine that anybody is going to call up
Building Control and ask them to come round with handcuffs.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl