digitalj Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 How's Average Joe going to know the difference between circuits in parallel and/or series and when to use what? How's Average Joe going to know the "loop at the light" or "loop at the switch" method? How's Average Joe going to know what type of cabling to use? Will Average Joe just go and get the cheapest cabling he can get not knowing that it may not be satisfactory for what it is intending to be used for? There are plenty of other stuff I'd be concerned with as well if Average Joe was allowed to wire up their place.
Roderick Posted June 12, 2008 Author Posted June 12, 2008 How's Average Joe going to know the difference between circuits in parallel and/or series and when to use what?How's Average Joe going to know the "loop at the light" or "loop at the switch" method? How's Average Joe going to know what type of cabling to use? Will Average Joe just go and get the cheapest cabling he can get not knowing that it may not be satisfactory for what it is intending to be used for? There are plenty of other stuff I'd be concerned with as well if Average Joe was allowed to wire up their place. It's not wiring up a whole house I'm concerned about. Few people in NZ are doing this anyway. It's replacing a broken switch or walll outlet, or moving a wall plate so you can paint behind it. Replacing a light fitting, etc, etc. In Canberra you are up for $200, at least for any of these, and thats if you can actually find a sparkie who will turn up. It's the small jobs that are problematic. The law is turning what should be a five minute exercise into a major time waster. Have a look at http://www.energysafety.govt.nz/upload/31994/brochure.pdf to see what the NZ government is on about. This is the brochure that shows a housewife fiddling with a light switch! None of this is rocket science, and a bit of education goes a long way. It saves lives, as people are going to fiddle anyway, regardless of the law. Rod
drsmith Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 If more people did their own small jobs it would also ease demand on the trade industries.
Mining Man Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 If more people did their own small jobs it would also ease demand on the trade industries. Someone told me once that legally, only a licensed plumber can replace tap washers. They were probably having a lend of me, but I think these are the examples that Rod is getting at in this thread, not complete housing wire-ups or something like gas fitting or black water plumbing.
myrantz Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 If more people did their own small jobs it would also ease demand on the trade industries. Which is prob why there are laws to prevent people not in trades to DIY?? I mean without these protection laws, they can't earn their big bucks..
Roderick Posted June 12, 2008 Author Posted June 12, 2008 (edited) Which is prob why there are laws to prevent people not in trades to DIY?? I mean without these protection laws, they can't earn their big bucks.. It's restrictive trade practices like this that is one difference between many poor and rich countries. From time to time you see surveys on the ease of setting up and doing business. Countries like the USA always come near the top, while South American countries like Brazil are way down the list because of their bureucratic impediments and entrenched rich class. I see recently, that Brazil has seen the errors of it's ways, and is trying to do something about it -- to improve the oportunities for the poor to advance themselves. The restrictions in Australia on who can do minor electrical work may seem a piddling affair, but add it up over the whole country, over some years, and you are probably talking about billions of dollars out of the pockets of ordinary citizens. The electricians have no sympathy from me. Look what has happened in the UK. Their indigenous plummers have be usurped by hordes of Polish plummers, who do a good job for half the price . Rod Edited June 12, 2008 by Roderick
myrantz Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 The electricians have no sympathy from me. Look what has happened in the UK. Their indigenous plummers have be usurped by hordes of Polish plummers, who do a good job for half the price . Out of curiosity, how much did you spend on ur last electrical job??? For my own I don't mind doing my own simple electrical stuffs, think I wouldn't do a re-wiring myself as that's more work (unless it's prohibitively expensive to get somebody to do it)... The only thing that's holding me from DIY is the chance I may void my building or contents insurance if I do it, and I hate spiders...
Roderick Posted June 12, 2008 Author Posted June 12, 2008 Out of curiosity, how much did you spend on ur last electrical job??? For my own I don't mind doing my own simple electrical stuffs, think I wouldn't do a re-wiring myself as that's more work (unless it's prohibitively expensive to get somebody to do it)... The only thing that's holding me from DIY is the chance I may void my building or contents insurance if I do it, and I hate spiders... I think it was the kitchen renovation, but the electrician was subcontracted by the kithen renovation company, and I don't know how much he was paid. He did a good job, except for the useless IR detector in the pantry cupboard -- I replaced that with a door-activated switch. These sorts of arrangements are generally more satisfactory than trying to hire an electrician yourself, as the kitchen company uses him often and would get reduced rates. He was also there for a few hours. I have since added (myself) two more 10 watt halogen downlights beneath the top cupboards, and a CFL downlight in one corner of the kitchen. I'll replace then with LEDs one day. Provided you do a proper job, there is no way your insurer is going to be concerned about any minor electrical work you do yourself. It should be irrelevant. It's only if your own shonky work causes a fire (or a death, heaven forbid) that you could be in trouble. You have to have confidence in your own knowledge and ability. Life is never perfectly safe! It's a lottery for many. Rod
myrantz Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 Provided you do a proper job, there is no way your insurer is going to be concerned about any minor electrical work you do yourself. It should be irrelevant. It's only if your own shonky work causes a fire (or a death, heaven forbid) that you could be in trouble. You have to have confidence in your own knowledge and ability. Life is never perfectly safe! It's a lottery for many. Guess I'm just overly pessimistic that insurance companies will use DIY as an excuse not to pay their obligations...
DrP Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 Provided you do a proper job, there is no way your insurer is going to be concerned about any minor electrical work you do yourself. The #1 reason they won't be 'concerned' is that they have no way of finding out. However should the insurer find out that you have performed illegal mains work, no matter how minor, any related coverage you have on your property will be cancelled faster than you can say BZZZT. If your property does catch fire or someone is electrocuted and the 'minor' work is questioned the truth will out and any coverage you had will be voided once again faster than you can say BZZZT.
Roderick Posted June 12, 2008 Author Posted June 12, 2008 The #1 reason they won't be 'concerned' is that they have no way of finding out. However should the insurer find out that you have performed illegal mains work, no matter how minor, any related coverage you have on your property will be cancelled faster than you can say BZZZT. If your property does catch fire or someone is electrocuted and the 'minor' work is questioned the truth will out and any coverage you had will be voided once again faster than you can say BZZZT. If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour.
myrantz Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. But if I have the money to take on the insurance agents and fight it out (like Corby), I don't even need to buy insurance to cover my ass in the first place.
(ツ) Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 (edited) If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. I admire your confidence, not suggesting you shouldn't do it - that's your choice. My personal choice is to get it done properly, no worries with insurance, set and forget. Put it this way, I wouldn't bet my house on it I don't believe in this "thingy" about ditching the traders' source of income, especially if it leads to anything like what we have in our NSW hospital system - crappy pay = not enough nurses = "have baby in corridor" episode. A perfect analogy to wanting some wiring done & can't because the trade died in the ass thanks to de-regulation. Edited June 12, 2008 by POWERZONE
Chui2 Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. You might be surprised how detailed, in some cases, fire cause determination can be
DrP Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. It wouldn't make it to court. Your property burns down. Police and fire do their investigation and determine the source of the fire was electrical and started 'here' - which just happened to be your bit of dodgey work. Upon hearing that something dodgey was done the insurer would appoint their own investigator who would then attempt to find out who did the work and from then on its all bad news for you. Bye bye coverage. You may even find that your policy has a clause in it along the lines that if any substandard work caused the fire / electrocution the policy is void. Insurance companies have been at this stuff a lot longer than you have. They've got their bases covered.
myrantz Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 (edited) If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. 4 people quoted the same paragraph so far... What is the longest record? Edited June 12, 2008 by treblid
DrP Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. Not sure.
(ツ) Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 (edited) If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. Couldn't resist it Rod, just hold off there for a sec will ya? Let the Duck have a go... Edited June 12, 2008 by POWERZONE
myrantz Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. We have a record yet???
(ツ) Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 (edited) If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. treblid, you should fix your 2nd last post because it broke the chain by not quoting the quote "thingy" Well done treblid Edited June 12, 2008 by POWERZONE
digitalj Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. wishful thinking
(ツ) Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. 30-0 last night dig What a hangover this morning
myrantz Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 (edited) If you took the insurance company to court, they would have to be able to prove that your work was the cause of the fire, or whatever. Otherwise the judge would rule in your favour. treblid, you should fix your 2nd last post because it broke the chain by not quoting the quote "thingy" Done... I'm rofl ATM, but Roderick, I hope you realised just how many things are wrong with that statement... I guess if the worst happens, you can always test the courts, but that is prob not the priority then. Edit: And some downlights (even the expensive ones) can be really dodgy... Your work may be A grade, but it means nothing if the thing still builds up heat and start a fire.. Will the insurance company still pay out then? It is yes before, but they will not be so friendly now that free credit is a thing of the past. If they think it's worth it to fight it out, they will... Edited June 12, 2008 by treblid
stahc Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 all i've got left is this if good old new zealand is so bloody great why don't they all bugger off back there there is nothing worse than blow ins complaining about australia
Spearmint Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 there is nothing worse than blow ins complaining about australia If only they could find some Australian's to complain to?
Recommended Posts