Tradesmen Fined for............

It appears that it was just an extension lead that caught fire.

https://www.dudley.gov.uk/news/tradesmen-fined-for-poor-electrical-work/


Z.

All of this needs a bit of careful consideration.


Some years ago I attended a two day training course at the Triton showers factory being taught how to install their products. Upon completion I was given a certificate of attendance along either a coffee mug, t-shirt and other freebies. I was also told I can advertise myself as a “Triton trained shower installer” which I still do, I was specifically hold I could claim to be a “Triton approved shower installer” because they fo not operate a approved installer scheme and it would require them to fo site inspections of my installations and sn audit of my procedures.


The electrician who has been fined is still advertising himself as “NICEIC trained” which he probably is, I have paid NAPIT to attend three training courses and on that basis I can claim I am NAPIT trained, in fact I am.


However going one step further and using certificates with the NICEIC logo or for that matter NAPIT or Triton Showers without their approval puts you firmly on the wrong side of the law.


Apart from that if you are asked by your brother in law or anyone else for that matter to provide an electrical test certificate for work that they did the best plan of action is to avoid doing so, particularly if it is not up to the required standard, to actually provide a certificate with the NICEIC logo on it is just obviously a really big mistake.


At the end of the day there are a substantial number of electricians, builders, plumbers and kitchen fitters driving around in vans with the NICEIC logo on it, at the end of the day it is illegal and they run the tide of being fined.


Some people really need to start to understand the difference between claiming that you have been trained by an organisation and inferring that you have been approved by them.


Andy

It is a good point, but I'm afraid it is an example of advertising slight of hand, rather like water resistant watches, that don't work in the wet, but equally do not actually dissolve, versus truly waterproof ones that may actually keep working as well. (Or chicken flavoured pies, that are not made with very much chicken.)


This sort of masquerade  has the highest pedigree. I remember being shown the prospectus for a prestigious private school, costing many £k per year, and it assured the reader that every year in excess of 100 pupils in the 6th form would apply to Oxford or Cambridge, which sounded very impressive, and no doubt a consequence of the small class sizes and intense cramming that such an expensive  system allows . What it omitted to mention however was that every year 90 or so of those applicants would fail to get in, and really all they were doing was cluttering up the university admissions procedure. Oddly, my old comprehensive, working with a far less elite intake, and a much less intense regime,  (a few years of past papers for the top set to practice on ) used to get half a dozen a year into Oxbridge, but made very little fanfare of it.


Actually I find it it is interesting that it should be trading standards and not building control legislation that is being enforced, and no mention of part P at all in this case. I suppose it shows which legislation has clearer 'teeth' as it sounds like the job in question  was actually quite badly done, and therefore a clear cut case, had it been done well, but the process not followed I suspect no-one would have blinked..

I should have checked my post late last night, it should have read:


”I was specifically TOLD I could NOT claim to be a “Triton approved shower installer” because they do not operate a approved installer scheme and it would require them to do site inspections of my installations and an audit of my procedures.”.


Which hopefully makes more sense.


Andy