I WOULD LIKE TO REPLY TO THE LETTER from Simon Abbott regarding Part P of the Building Regulations (February edition) and put things in perspective when it comes to definitions.

(Incidently, I attended a Part P meeting held in Leeds this week and the leaflet given out by the Deputy Prime Minister’s Office showed the testing of a socket outlet with a neon screwdriver ... and to crown it all, the end of the screwdriver is on the negative terminal! It caused quite a lot of concern for the 130 odd people who attended.)

The word ‘Megger’ is the name of a company that produces and sells electrical test equipment, on a par with such great companies as ACT Meters, Fluke and Robin, Seward and Avo etc.

To state that an alarm company does not need to be certified and "competent" in completing Minor/Small Works certificates, is also incorrect and therefore misleading. I hate it when I have to admonish owners, proprietors, directors, consultants and managers of companies and point out to them that they all have a "Duty of Care” under the Health & Safety at Work Acts 1974 , The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 – The provision & Use of Work Equipment 1992.

The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 imposes duties upon all employers, The self employed and of course employees. These regulations cover the requirements with regard to the specifications, the design and its installation and construction, plus the maintenance and servicing of all electrical systemsIn this context it covers voltage levels from 400 Kv down to an electrician’s torch (ie 1.5 dc volts) – not the simple 50vAC, that Mr Abbott mentions (Extra Low Volt Systems). Also the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1992 (Reg 11) stipulates that employers are to provide their employees with health and safety training. (manual handling etc ... especially when it comes to Friday and they have to lift their heavy pay packets of the table!)

Lets all get with it and get qualified and be deemed "Competent Persons”