If a company has a napit registration and not the individual does this allow for the individual to test and inspect.
But if the company is a facilities management company and the client requires c&g 2391 were does the individual stand.

I suspect the facilities management company would be in breach of contract, and may not necessarily get their money from the client. Specifying that a company provides a person with C&G2391 to carry out the "test and inspection" seems a reasonable requirement to me.

Regards,

Alan.

There are a lot of questions in the OP.

The client has specified an individual carrying out the work to have 2391. So the company sending the person to site should have the qualification. That is a very sensible and reasonable requirement. I would say that should be a C&G 2391 and not a qualification using the figure 2391. I would also add 2382 if I were specifying the inspectors competency.

The fact the company is NAPIT, or any other logo, registered is almost irrelevant.

I thought one of the USPs of NAPIT registered companies was they only used qualified persons to carry out inspection and testing?

-------------------------
John Peckham

http://www.astutetechnicalservices.co.uk/

I think that all operatives are registered and inspected. When I use the Napit site for notifying it opens a drop down window to select the name of the operative. Obviously in my case there is only one name but I seem to remember being advised that it would cost another £x per operative, per year and that membership criteria would apply to all and an inspection fee for half a day for each operative. Inspections on a one to one basis. Sounds reasonable.

For I&T under the Napit banner an inspection and testing qualification is required within a year of joining. They also require you to have professional indemnity insurance.

JP, C&G? Other qualifications are available...Word-up is that the Napit version is actually pretty robust and is more informative. For a Napit member it would be an option but it might not have any value outside of Napit.

Zs

-------------------------
'The desk is a dangerous place from which to view the world.'
John Le Carre

Normally if an individual works for a company, they are covered by the company when on company business during Business hours.
The minute they start work on someone elses work outside the company that employes them, they dont have any registration or right to do, say part P stuff themselves, unless they personally are registered in shape or form.
IMHO everyone doing T and I should have 2391.

The amount of @@@@holes i come across who say they are niceic this that and the other, when all they are is someone who works during the day for a registered firm with someone supervising them. Outside work they know nothing.

-------------------------
----------------------------------------
Lack of planning on your part doesn't make it an emergency on mine....

Every man has to know his limitations- Dirty Harry

If a Testing and Inspection electrician is qualifed, competent and employed by a reputable electrical contractor who are a member of Napit etc..... And despite his best efforts - If something should go wrong - How protected is the Inspector by working for the company and being covered by their insurance? How liable is the individual?

I have discussed this with other inspectors and I wonder if a situation has arisen where most of the liability is on the employed inspector - whilst at the same time it is the company that is making all the money!

Several years ago I was doing work for a kitchen firm that had a gas fitter on the books, at the assessment for registration only the fitter was present, the Gas Safe assessor stopped the proceedings and summoned the boss to attend who protested that his attendance was not required as he wasn't a gas fitter. He was told in no uncertain terms that he was fully responsible for everything that occurred under the firms registration should it be awarded to them. Andy

Well I hope not. I've not been assesed for three years. Unlike some who demand an annual assessment because it is charged every year, I've always looked upon it as a hassle postponed in a busy life.

However, I spoke to Napit about it and they say that they risk assess and that I was very low on the list. But that no more than three years would go by. As sure as eggs is eggs, I have one in a couple of weeks.

I doubt that not being assessed has invalidated any insurance Prof, because the due diligence and paper trail has always been in place ready to prove if required and communication has taken place.

Pete, We meet some brilliant people out there who have few or no badges and C&G is not the only route to knowledge. We use knowledge daily which no examiner is ever going to test or to know about. IMO the value is in being an enthusiast and giving everything your best shot. I'd be cautious about a specification for a 2391/2396 as a given requirement because, to put it bluntly, they're both an excercise in doing maths and using the regs and do not send anyone out into the world with what it takes to understand electrical systems. That comes from being keen and messing around in the shed replicating things you have come across during the day, and getting your head around them. Or whatever works for you of course.

What the badges do is give a prosepective employer the very beginning of a yard-stick and prove that the applicant can turn up for college, do a shed-load of homework, and has the basics.

I love the brain of the unqualified enthusiast much more than the brain of someone waving a few sheets of paper at me. Some of those guys out there with no formal qualifications have a streak of absolute genius going on between their ears. I dare to hope that the Zs mind is of more value than the bits of paper in a drawer. A proud Dad though, which validates the paperwork beyond everything.

Hopefully sowie will let us know the outcome of his OP. But, in passing...OMS, have you got a 2391 or a 2396? I genuinely don't know but am rather hoping that you might not have, cos you've got good stuff going on between your ears.


Zs

-------------------------
'The desk is a dangerous place from which to view the world.'
John Le Carre

Well I hope not. I've not been assesed for three years. Unlike some who demand an annual assessment because it is charged every year, I've always looked upon it as a hassle postponed in a busy life.

However, I spoke to Napit about it and they say that they risk assess and that I was very low on the list. But that no more than three years would go by. As sure as eggs is eggs, I have one in a couple of weeks.

I doubt that not being assessed has invalidated any insurance Prof, because the due diligence and paper trail has always been in place ready to prove if required and communication has taken place.

Pete, We meet some brilliant people out there who have few or no badges and C&G is not the only route to knowledge. We use knowledge daily which no examiner is ever going to test or to know about. IMO the value is in being an enthusiast and giving everything your best shot. I'd be cautious about a specification for a 2391/2396 as a given requirement because, to put it bluntly, they're both an excercise in doing maths and using the regs and do not send anyone out into the world with what it takes to understand electrical systems. That comes from being keen and messing around in the shed replicating things you have come across during the day, and getting your head around them. Or whatever works for you of course.

What the badges do is give a prosepective employer the very beginning of a yard-stick and prove that the applicant can turn up for college, do a shed-load of homework, and has the basics.

I love the brain of the unqualified enthusiast much more than the brain of someone waving a few sheets of paper at me. Some of those guys out there with no formal qualifications have a streak of absolute genius going on between their ears. I dare to hope that the Zs mind is of more value than the bits of paper in a drawer. A proud Dad though, which validates the paperwork beyond everything.

Hopefully sowie will let us know the outcome of his OP. But, in passing...OMS, have you got a 2391 or a 2396? I genuinely don't know but am rather hoping that you might not have, cos you've got good stuff going on between your ears.


Zs


You know... Just every now and then, someone talks absolute... Sense.

Ah Zs, this was not aimed in defence of badge snobs or collectors, but people who basically lie, and use others affiliations to garner work when they have no legitimate claim. And very importantly, people doing a quick job on the way home who are not insured.
My 2 favourite suspects: Jonny who fell out of college and fred down the pub.

I think the majority of people on this forum are truly enthusiastic, but unfortunatly i think the other 99pc not on here go to college for a few years forget most of it and carry on regardless of changes with their head in the sand.

( ive seen too many 15th/16th edition boards put in recently to know we are not all commited to learning )

-------------------------
----------------------------------------
Lack of planning on your part doesn't make it an emergency on mine....

Every man has to know his limitations- Dirty Harry

15th /16th Edition boards ?
What might they be then?
Is there such a thing as a 17th Edition board? No.
a 14th Edition board?
13th, 12th ................... 1st

-------------------------
Regards,
Ebee (M I S P N)

Knotted cables cause Lumpy Lektrik

I am not a member of a competent person scheme but I am an NICEIC Approved Contractor. I get assessed every year when the nice NICEIC Area engineer comes to call.he spends a fair bit of time checking I have current insurance, regs book, EAWR, BS5266, BS5839, PAT COP, calibration, complaints register, etc. Last year my new man wanted a copy of my 2382 which had been checked the previous years as they had been detecting forgeries when visiting others.

This year he spent more time than in the past going through my PIRs and EICRs I understand that is after the Emma Shaw case. Then out on site checking I can still test and comparing the results with those written down on my forms. I think a risk based assessment would be appropriate, I would say that anyway, as it has been the same thing for 9 years without detecting in major none compliances. So hopefully I could get a reduced fee and others who are found wanting every year get closer scrutiny. That is unlikely to happen as that would impact on the NICEICs income.

I believe the assessments should be risked based and not time based.


My view on persons employed by the approved company who are permitted to I&T should have a record kept of their qualifications with copies on file and dates of when the QS assessed them out on site. We have to keep records of meter calibration and monthly accuracy checks but nothing for the people we might send out on site to use the kit.


Of course this will not happen as it would impact on the various bodies income a point which was picked up by the Parliamentary Select Committee.

-------------------------
John Peckham

http://www.astutetechnicalservices.co.uk/

Well Zs, NAPIT's assessments sound like getting an MOT, without having the bother of having your cars safety inspected, I am sure you work is fab though and don't worry you are not the only one.


Good to hear that you have suddenly been assessed though. -


A great money earning scam though, £200 a year for non assessment, so £600+ straight in the back pocket!


..... "Risk based inspections have not yet begun for any Competent Person Schemes as yet but are likely to begin in 2012." (DCLG Buildings Division , 2011)

I thought one of the great scams is telling everyone that portable appliance testing needs to be carried out annually costing businesses £30 million a year in assessments of their electrical equipment.

Lets be honest, is a electrician and tester with a good track record really going to deteriorate so quickly that a annual assessment of their capabilities is required? Of course not.

However if we end up going with a Gas Safe type approach, we could end up in college every five years proving our skills, so be careful what you wish for, to quote RnR.

Personally, like Zs, I have not seen a assessor lately. However since my last assessment I have gained the City and Guilds Solar qualification and the BPEC Ventilation qualification both with practical assessments, so I can claim a record of ongoing professional development with evidence of the outcome. But regards the solar, I may have the paperwork, but as yet I have not been any where near a roof to complete a installation, thus I have the knowledge without any experience, so it doesn't make me a good solar PV installer does it?

Going back to the original post, the if the client has stated that the work be carried out by a individual with a specific qualification and this contract clause is not complied with, then client may instruct any person carrying out the work without the specified qualification to leave the site immediately and refuse to accept any of the completed certification as valid. The employer is then responsible for clearing up the mess.

However if at any time the employee has personally made claims to have a specific qualification and if that is not true, then the employer and the employee are responsible for clearing up the mess.

As to whether any other testing and inspection qualification is valid is a contractual matter that should have been sorted out before work commenced, believe it or not City and Guilds don't have a monopoly on qualifications, indeed other qualifications are available.

Andy

Edited: 12 August 2012 at 09:17 PM by sparkingchip

True Sparkingchip, maybe we are better off paying DCLG's Schemes for an assessment that they don't do.

But wait a minute 5 years x £200 for a sham assessment, it would be cheaper!, Gas safe is only £210, not £400- £500 a year.

Given a choice I would go for the Gas Safe System, as an Electrician I would prefer to be tested on my skills, rather than have anybody with a Cheque Book who can spell NICEIC, NAPIT or ELECSA, claiming to be an Electrician.

As to the OP, if it is a contractual requirement to have a 2391 then that is what should be provided.

If does not matter what your Scheme will accept, they are only allowing you to register to Self Certify under Part P, they are not saying you are Competent or an Electrician, which is why they use term Domestic Installer.

Do not forget there are others, who are quite capable to inspect and test electrical installations,
C Eng, I Eng, Eng Tec, many may have come up through the slide rule but once experienced learned not that easily forgotten. Unfortunately, the latter sounds pompous to those who do not look beyond the 2391. However, it is necessary to have some form of qualification. If your qualification stands up in a court of law, even the phoney government oriented part P, then you can inspect and test to your hearts content.

What about already JIB qualified, 2391 was not a requirement before the recent private stakeholders dreamed it up, not having the difficult (C & G 2391) excluding the bought one, qualification, should others with different type of qualification stop inspecting and testing. JIB, is well thought off in Scotland anyhow, some clients ask if electrical staff is JIB qualified in order to get the job.

A brief summery:
If you are a qualified Electrician (C&G 2360/2330/2356 or equivalent) and you are seeking JIB Approved Electrician status then C&G 2391 is a requirement to achieve this.

Does the C&G2391 count for anything?
Yes it will, you can apply for your Approved Electrician grade with the JIB with it. JIB companies should then pay you slightly more than your standard electrician rate for the privilege. You will need 2 years post qualification experience to get the grading. Source:
http://www.electricalqualifica...g2391level3.php


Let's face it qualifications or no qualifications both are equally capable of writing verbiage, in trying to comply with the over-elaborate background information BS7671.

Not forgetting the required NVQ level three for JIB though jcm. Before loads of people leap for an application form.

My JIB card allows me to use my 2360/2391/2396 etc. for sweeping up only.

Zs

-------------------------
'The desk is a dangerous place from which to view the world.'
John Le Carre

The NVQ 3 cant be the only requirement for JIB Approved status,i havent and never will have an NVQ in electrical installation work,although i do have 236 pts 1&2, C&G Electricians Cert,2382, 2391 & 30years experience and my gold card says JIB Grade - Approved Electrician.

-------------------------
Regards

Dave(not Cockburn)

Well, - 2396 was a tad before my time - I did a C&G 236 and "C" certificate along with ONC/OND as part of my apprenticeship - indentures and all that jazz.

I did a 16th edition update course in order for C&G to allow me to take the 2391 - I did it because I was out of work and had been offered the qualifying managers job with a large national contractor - it was great fun reading the fiction that passed for test certificates for a site at the other end of the country which I neither visited or knew the individual testers involved (or at least thier capability) - one man to sign off and a lot of idiots filling in forms - with the final payment resting on those signed of EIC's - go figure, I signed on the dotted line because I needed the job until something else came along

I don't have a 17th edition update certificate - never did the 2400 (although I used to teach it (in part) ) - and for sure I'm not going to do the 2396 course - not after the dramas you went through

So, not quite an uneducated oik I'm afraid, but close enough to it for me to have a CSCS sweeper upper card as well - but then again, design is 90% about understanding the way people use buildings - the remaining 10% is just a little bit of basic theory - and C&G don't teach anything along those lines, for certain -

Best regards

OMS

-------------------------
Failure is always an option

Try a google for "Vicarious Liability" - if you are employed (or effectively employed regardless of IR 35) then the company is liable for all your actions - provided your actions are reasonable

regards

OMS

-------------------------
Failure is always an option