The age old electricity question?!?!?!

Can I be really dense and ask what ROFL means aswell then, I think my teenage son is curling up with mortification at my "past it" behaviour LOL

 

Hi folks. I actually think that BAS is here to demonstrate his 'prowess' and NOT to offer up helpful advice. There, I said it

 

I tend to agree. When at college I was given to understand that those who use overly technical terms did so for two reasons, to attempt to deliberately exclude those who did not use the terms from understanding the concept being discussed, and to demonstrate to those that did, that the user belonged.

The very best lecturers-those I learnt the most from did not do this. There is a very famous philosopher Bertrand Russell that actually despised this technique. It is a form of intellectual bullying.

All the above is only my opinion.

 

a difference of opinion is what makes a forum and a good debate....if we all agreed on the same thing then they have to go:thumb:

 

I agree that simple terms are plenty good enough to get across most concepts. You only really need to get technical to explain something in greater depth.
I wonder if he`s any good at physics, fluid dynamics/mechanics and the like?

 

They're making that half of the problem safer, and the fact that it's very hard to see how you could regulate one half doesn't mean you shouldn't do the other half.

More on that in a minute.

No, I'm not, but in terms of Part P there's not a great deal to know - it's quite straightforwardly defined in the Building Regulations.

I very much doubt that deaths have gone down - they were so low to begin with that it'd be hard to tell anyway. In the consultation document and Regulatory Impact Analysis that the govt did they had to fudge the numbers to make it look like Part P would be worthwhile and even their specious promised benefits were small.

As an aside, as this is the water gardening section you might be interested to know that (when I last looked at the figures) on average 20 people a year are drowned in garden ponds...

Let's hope they come up with nothing - other countries have tried tighter, and wider, restrictions on who can do what - Australia is a good example, and the end result is actually more casualties...

 

Hello, ban-all-sheds, and welcome to GC.

I've not spoken to you before but I've read the threads and being an 'old timer' here I will say I know zero about the subject in question but I do have a couple of questions which you may choose to answer or not ....

1. What is your profession?
2. Why are you so adamant about this particular subject?

 

Well your "funny feeling" is misleading you into being completely wrong.

The Building Regulations 2000, as amended by several later Statutory Instruments. Made under the auspices of the Building Act 1984, contravention of them is an offence punishable by up to 6 months in prison and a fine of up to £5,000.

There seem to be two different issues at stake in this thread, and it's important not to conflate them.

1) Part P of the Building Regulations

IMO an ill-conceived, ill-thought out and unnecessary piece of legislation, with no safety justification, brought into being at the behest of the electrical contracting industry in order to give them more control over the electrical installation market.

However, it is the law. Breaking it can have consequences down the line, and I do not believe that advising people to ignore it is a responsible thing to do. I would never refuse to give people helpful advice because I thought they were going to break it, but anyone who does break it should do so as a result of his or her own informed decision, not because they were advised to.

I've actually said very little here about Part P apart from my initial criticism of Pete's post. (Please don't take any of the above as an invitation to start that argument up again - we'll just go round saying the same things over).


2) The IET Wiring Regulations aka BS 7671

Not a law, but very definitely not something that should be ignored - any "informed" decision to not do what they say should be very well informed indeed. "I ain't gonna notify" is one thing, but "I ain't gonna comply with the Wiring Regulations" is quite another. Maybe in practice you're quite likely to get away with ignoring them, for as long as nothing goes wrong, just like in practice I could have got away (so far) with ignoring the law on wearing a seat belt, but the day that someone does put a spade through a cable that you thought was safe enough you may rue your decision.

To be able to judge when it's safe to contravene them requires you to know a great deal about them, and why they say what they do - ironically you'd need to be more than capable of following them to be able to know how and when it'd be safe to not follow them.

And not following them should never be a policy, and suggestions that they're just a pettifogging nuisance, or some OTT rules that don't really matter, are seriously misplaced. They have been developed and refined over the last 120 years with the sole aim of improving safety. Of course after all that time they're into the realm of diminishing returns, but when you understand them it's clear that they are fundamentally unarguable, and it's rare for it to make more sense to ignore them than to do what they say.

I have a lot of experience of reading and understanding the wiring regulations and Part P, a lot of experience advising people on both, a lot of experience of domestic electrical work and advising on that and I am a qualified Domestic Installer.

 

well that sorted that out,, :thumb:
Originally Posted by JWK
I've a funny feeling that he has no electrical qualifications or experience of any sort,
Well your "funny feeling" is misleading you into being completely wrong.


Quote:
strange then that he should be telling us about breaking the 'law' - what law?
The Building Regulations 2000, as amended by several later Statutory Instruments. Made under the auspices of the Building Act 1984, contravention of them is an offence punishable by up to 6 months in prison and a fine of up to £5,000...cheers for all the info and for putting him in his place:D

 

"Sowing the seeds of discord"?

You're the one repeatedly calling me a troll, and repeatedly implying that I'm a liar.

I did not come here to cause trouble, or create strife, but if people are going to behave like you then you'd better believe that I am not going to sit quietly by and let them get away with it.

Indeed it is and you might.

So that's it, is it?

You were so offended by what I said with regard to the "sheds" (a view shared by others here, you might like to note) that you keep on insulting me and you say I have to go?

What I said was generic, and not directed at anyone personally - what's your excuse for the things you keep saying about me personally?

And why are you so incensed about "they are staffed by idiots" but not it seems by someone telling Pete that one of his posts was moronic?

 

ere ere:thumb::thumb::thumb:

 

Great stuff B- A- S keep it going, no one on these boards dictates who should go except N athan and his mods.

 

My point exactly Walnut