Scotland - Home Of The Unworkable Law

Owain_Moneysaver

Building standards require new alarms to be mains powered and interlinked. It's highly unlikely that standard would be lowered for new installations in existing buildings.

It's not just the cost of the alarms. It's the cost of the electrician to install the alarms, the application and fee to the local council for a building warrant or self-certification, the re-decoration etc.

And why do I need a carbon monoxide detector too? There is no gas or solid fuel in my property.

molerat

I can now see an opening for dodgy salesman frightening old ladies and fleecing them out of £Ks.

Knock Knock
Hello old lady, did you know you must have smoke alarms by law
We can fit these lovely mains ones for only £1000, we don't want you burning to death or going to prison now do we.
Oh, just found a problem. Your fuse box is not up to standard so we need to replace it, only another £1000. We don't want you going to prison do we.

Slinky

agrinnall wrote: »

How difficult would it have been to have a bit of foresight and keep a spare battery in the house?

We had no idea that a dead battery would result in a chirping smoke alarm in a mains connected system, it was the first time we'd had such a system and we had no instructions. I'm sure that a lot of people have no idea that removing the batteries until you can buy new won't stop it. We'd only ever had battery operated stand alone alarms before.


We have spares now.

sgun

We fitted interlinked mains heat and smoke alarms in a one bed flat. Under 300 pounds fitted. No need to redecorate. Still a lot of money but nowhere near 1000 pounds.

glasgowdan

sgun wrote: »

We fitted interlinked mains heat and smoke alarms in a one bed flat. Under 300 pounds fitted. No need to redecorate. Still a lot of money but nowhere near 1000 pounds.

Molerat isn't saying it'll cost £1000.

molerat

Just another Scottish Government (SNP control freakery) sledgehammer to crack a nut.

I suppose they will collect a lot of VAT along the way, they need to do something to plug the £40M expected tax hole from their alcohol minimum pricing from May.

AdrianC

glasgowdan wrote: »

Molerat isn't saying it'll cost £1000.

GLD73 did, back in post 13.

glasgowdan

AdrianC wrote: »

GLD73 did, back in post 13.

No they didn't. GLD referred to electrical and smoke/heat requirements for a landlord. So that will include electrical certificate, maybe some rewiring or other electrical work, possibly PAT tests...

steampowered

pinklady21 wrote: »

Agree with you about Nanny State though - and intrigued as to how such a law (regardless of whether it is a good idea or not) can possibly be enforced, retrospectively, in every home in the country.

What do you think about the law which says people must wear a seatbelt.

Do you think that is an example of the nanny state too?

Do you think it is possible for that law to be enforced in every car in the country?

Mojisola

molerat wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-43443725

Are we going to see little old ladies sent to prison for refusing. Are they going to be breaking down doors and force fitting ?

However admirable the intention a totally unworkable regulation which goes against all retrospective building law conventions.

If the insurance companies refuse to insure buildings that don't comply, it will soon become the norm.