barooga Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 hi barooga,in a way 'he' (angus) is incorrect by default, because as yet there is no cast iron wording (imo) referred to by some authoritative body which clamps down on the alarm trade or the diy'er, and states 'we' must install to the same designs and rigors as qualified electricians do, although fully appreciating many things we do are obviously based on that trades best practice's. regs alan In your opinion?? So that makes Angus wrong?? Part P covers it. You will install safely. That means, in compliance with Part P and BS7671. People can't selectively exclude themselves simply because they thought it didn't apply. By following PD6662, you will be installing safely. Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional
barooga Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 And, regarding working safely. Would it be safe if fitting the PSU posted earlier? Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional
arfur mo Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 hi angus, no not clouding any issue's deliberately, and don't think i'm out of my depth either. i'm just trying to 'tease out' the more structured arguments, for and against to be honest. what i'm failing to do is get you to differentiate between construction industry legislation for electrical works and its set of reg's, and trades which are not construction industry like ours, and work if you like more to common law (our standards apart). you contend we have to comply with every one of those construction industry regs (regarding electrics), where imo your mistaken as not all of it applies to 'us'. i have done some reading up on part 'p', and lots of reference's. when authors are explaining certain regs it is obvious it refers to power related safety issues and best practice within those regs, i just think your mistaken in thinking we have to exercise that degree of safety because we don't present that degree of jeopardy in our actions. if we did, then it follows for mechanical protection alone the cables we use would be the same 1mm quality as used for lighting, now that would be fun getting into a pir , mind you given the current EN panels, theres plenty of room at the controls regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!!
barooga Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 hi angus,no not clouding any issue's deliberately, and don't think i'm out of my depth either. i'm just trying to 'tease out' the more structured arguments, for and against to be honest. what i'm failing to do is get you to differentiate between construction industry legislation for electrical works and its set of reg's, and trades which are not construction industry like ours, and work if you like more to common law (our standards apart). you contend we have to comply with every one of those construction industry regs (regarding electrics), where imo your mistaken as not all of it applies to 'us'. i have done some reading up on part 'p', and lots of reference's. when authors are explaining certain regs it is obvious it refers to power related safety issues and best practice within those regs, i just think your mistaken in thinking we have to exercise that degree of safety because we don't present that degree of jeopardy in our actions. if we did, then it follows for mechanical protection alone the cables we use would be the same 1mm quality as used for lighting, now that would be fun getting into a pir , mind you given the current EN panels, theres plenty of room at the controls regs alan ??? Arfur, you're losing me here, What construction industry regs?? Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional
arfur mo Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 In your opinion??So that makes Angus wrong?? Part P covers it. You will install safely. That means, in compliance with Part P and BS7671. People can't selectively exclude themselves simply because they thought it didn't apply. By following PD6662, you will be installing safely. no, totally wrong tack with respect, it's not about my opinion being king and angus is wrong based on it, angus stated his opinion but i'm not alone in needing convincing, and this is a debate which may or may not convince me along with others. you state part p covers it - i'm asking you or others please show me where, and then back up your actual interpretation where it applies to an electronics industry, that is what we have been doing here. we are interpreting what is printed and debating if it actually applies in part or in full. no one is skiving out or shirking anything at all, i run a business in my oen right and i take it very very seriously. it's not hobby, so to be quit honest that was such a silly remark, if i was not that concerned and really that cavalier, i like others of the same mind, would have dropped out of this debate ages ago, and left angus to it. regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!!
arfur mo Posted January 31, 2008 Posted January 31, 2008 ???Arfur, you're losing me here, What construction industry regs?? to comply with building regs you have to comply with part p, i don't know building yet which was not a construction regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!!
barooga Posted January 31, 2008 Posted January 31, 2008 to comply with building regs you have to comply with part p, i don't know building yet which was not a constructionregs alan Sorry Arfur, but you are just obfuscating the issue. Read the document, it states it all in there. Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional
arfur mo Posted January 31, 2008 Posted January 31, 2008 Sorry Arfur, but you are just obfuscating the issue. Read the document, it states it all in there. i also read another document, mentioned 'works of a minor nature' and so not being notifiable. seems to me that allows for a lot of scope for maneuvering, as at which point would an alarm system be deemed to become substantial enough to be notifiable, or even major works? if it is concidered 'notifiable works', then it follows every installation will need self certification - if so how many are doing that then - and are you? i'm no lawyer, but i think you can often read into regulations, a scope which just is not actually there. regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!!
topalarms Posted January 31, 2008 Posted January 31, 2008 Certain "jobs" have an exemption from the requirment for the work to be inspected and tested by the BCO, thats all it is - an exemption from testing and veryfying by a third party, not an exemption from having to comply with Part P Part P is primarily designed for mains electrical installations but due to it being poorly thought out we now have the possibility of having to notify a 12-volt dc PIR in a kitchen on a non-SELV circuit. However it is perfectly easy for a DIYer or Alarm Installer to avoid the issue of Part P by doing what I have aready stated above. You have to comply with the requirement for a licence if you drive but if you use a bike you don't have to worry about it! Of course Part P is applicable to domestic only and it has nothing to do with the original question about a DIYer having to comply with EN/PD/BS - they don't. (SELV - Small Expendable Launch Vehicle [NASA program])
Guest anguscanplay Posted January 31, 2008 Posted January 31, 2008 i also read another document, mentioned 'works of a minor nature' and so not being notifiable. seems to me that allows for a lot of scope for maneuvering, as at which point would an alarm system be deemed to become substantial enough to be notifiable, or even major works? regs alan Part P is primarily designed for mains electrical installations but due to it being poorly thought out we now have the possibility of having to notify a 12-volt dc PIR in a kitchen on a non-SELV circuit.However it is perfectly easy for a DIYer or Alarm Installer to avoid the issue of Part P by doing what I have aready stated above. You have to comply with the requirement for a licence if you drive but if you use a bike you don't have to worry about it! Of course Part P is applicable to domestic only and it has nothing to do with the original question about a DIYer having to comply with EN/PD/BS - they don't. (SELV - Small Expendable Launch Vehicle [NASA program]) your both still tied up on the notification elemant to Part P - there is an exemption to NOTIFYING certain works, not an exemption to complying with the rest of the requirments if the work does not need notifying I`ll try and run through this once more for you Tops Buildng regulations Part P says " you need to install safely........" so to show compliance with that requirment you need to show you "installed safely...." the only practical way to do this is by complying with the published British Standard, which for wiring in the UK is BS7671,BS7671 also says you need to install EACH element "safely......." and the only practical way to do this in the case of an alarm ssytem is to comply with EN/PD662:2004 so we have a law Part P which HAS to be complied with and a means of complying - the fact "its only 12v........" and " I thought i could avoid it by not going near the bathroom....." or "well no ones ever going to know........" are irrelevant. No Arfur you cant do one bit (minor works certs for the electrical install) and ignore the other bits, yes its unlikely your going to get sent to jail for not complying with the requirments of building regs but then again you (or your kin) might need to sell your house one day too ( possibly to pay the travel costs if your non " installed safely....." control unit did cause the fire that destroyed a row of terrace houses) THERE IS A LAW - IT`S BUILDING REGS Angus ps - Tops - a pir in a kitchen is non notifyable BTW - its not classed as a special location for ELV curcuits
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.