This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

PROPOSED ELECTRICAL LEGISLATION

The government have produced draft regulations on the periodic inspection and testing of domestic installations.


It can be found here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2020/9780111191934


I have serious concerns with the proposed definition of "qualified" as it does not require anyone to have any qualifications whatsoever , so it does not do what it says on the tin. It perpetuates the current practice of any knuckle scraping half whit who does not know their amp from the elbow carrying out inspection and testing. Without setting out defined required qualifications it becomes unenforceable.


Unless an MP makes an objection as Secondary it will become law without debate. I have written to my recently Knighted MP this morning to explain my views on the proposed legislation and in particular the definition of "Qualified" that contains no requirement to have any qualifications. 


Unless the government gets any objections these Regulations will become law. Only an MP can get proposed secondary legislation changed.


You may wish to join me in writing to your MP?
Parents
  • I don't share John's concern.


    First, a procedural note. When you see the House of Commons on the telly, some of the piles of papers on the big table in front of the Speaker contain draft Regulations. It is up to MPs whether to look at them or not - they can get a personal copy. Then they can respond or not. I suspect that under the current powerful Government, no changes will be made.


    Second, the consultation period is over. (Without one, the SoS's Regulations could be challenged by judicial review.)


    The consultation results are here.


    The Government's response to the consultation is here.


    You will see that guidance as to who a competent person might be will follow Scotland, whose guidance is here - see Annex A.


    So basically Part Pee registered! Given that the competent person must be able (but not necessarily willing) to undertake the remedial work, which could be notifiable, this does not seem unreasonable. However, non-scheme members will be able to demonstrate their competence (and insurance, etc.) independently. The onus is upon a landlord to show that an inspector was competent.
Reply
  • I don't share John's concern.


    First, a procedural note. When you see the House of Commons on the telly, some of the piles of papers on the big table in front of the Speaker contain draft Regulations. It is up to MPs whether to look at them or not - they can get a personal copy. Then they can respond or not. I suspect that under the current powerful Government, no changes will be made.


    Second, the consultation period is over. (Without one, the SoS's Regulations could be challenged by judicial review.)


    The consultation results are here.


    The Government's response to the consultation is here.


    You will see that guidance as to who a competent person might be will follow Scotland, whose guidance is here - see Annex A.


    So basically Part Pee registered! Given that the competent person must be able (but not necessarily willing) to undertake the remedial work, which could be notifiable, this does not seem unreasonable. However, non-scheme members will be able to demonstrate their competence (and insurance, etc.) independently. The onus is upon a landlord to show that an inspector was competent.
Children
No Data