Scotland - Home Of The Unworkable Law

sgun

I did do it as a landlord. It included everything. All rewiring, certification etc. No PAT tests as not needed. Our electrician was excellent, happy to recommend if anyone wants.

molerat

steampowered wrote: »

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?

That law is easily enforceable through the current regime of road policing and MOT testing. Currently very few officials without a warrant can enter a private home. Any way of enforcement would run roughshod over citizens rights, not something the StaziNP worry about though. Rented homes and new builds again have a mechanism for enforcement through building regulation sign off and rental property checks.

steampowered

molerat wrote: »

That law is easily enforceable through the current regime of road policing and MOT testing. Currently very few officials without a warrant can enter a private home. Any way of enforcement would run roughshod over citizens rights, not something the StaziNP worry about though. Rented homes and new builds again have a mechanism for enforcement through building regulation sign off and rental property checks.

Moving back into the real world, it is impossible for the police to make sure that someone in the backseat of a private car is wearing a seatbelt. It isn't an enforceable law. That doesn't mean it is a bad law though.

'Property checks' are not an enforcement mechanism. The 'checks' are only relevant if there is a law to start with in the first place! The fact that a law has been passed will now mean that new builds and rental properties have these alarms going forwards.

Owain_Moneysaver

molerat wrote: »

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

And here's an electrician's response:

https://www.electriciansforums.co.uk/threads/smoke-alarm-rules-to-apply-to-all-homes-in-scotland.139314/

Bonanza. Kerching.

molerat

steampowered wrote: »

Moving back into the real world, it is impossible for the police to make sure that someone in the backseat of a private car is wearing a seatbelt. It isn't an enforceable law. That doesn't mean it is a bad law though. It is enforceable, police officers have eyes so there is a real risk of "getting caught".

'Property checks' are not an enforcement mechanism. The 'checks' are only relevant if there is a law to start with in the first place! The fact that a law has been passed will now mean that new builds and rental properties have these alarms going forwards.

New builds and rentals are already covered by an existing mechanism. New builds by building regulations checks and electrical sign offs, rented property by a tenant complaint and officers being invited into the property.

But the seatbelt law was not retrospectively introduced.

steampowered

You don't seem to be recognising that there is a difference between what the law says and enforcement.

Noone is suggesting that police officers will be breaking down people's doors to check for fire alarms.

Frankly a law that just says everyone needs to have a smoke alarm is much simpler than changing the building regs for new builds alongside creating new rules for lettings. Slicing and dicing the housing market like that is how you end up with a twisted bureaucratic mess of law. There is something to be said for keeping the law simple!

eschaton

molerat wrote: »

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.

Just more pish from the SNP. Nothing should ever surprise with that lot.

I've got a mains smoke alarm upstairs and downstairs along with a carbon monoxide detector downstairs. That's all I need. I'm about to spend £22k on my house and an interlinked system like that isn't on the list.

Cakeguts

The Scottish "thought police" are going to have to visit every smokers house in Scotland to check that they have any fire alarms with batteries in them.

iammumtoone

glasgowdan wrote: »

The issue people will have with this is that it belongs in a nanny state. Whether or not it's the best/safest thing to do, it's not for a government to tell people what to have in their own homes.

But its not just people in their own homes who are effected. Those who live in terrace houses are reliant on their neighbours having smoke alarms to protect their house/family.

What about the firefighters who have to put their lives unnecessarily at risk due to someone not having a smoke alarm.

davidmcn

AdrianC wrote: »

Not if they don't NEED to be interlinked, just "should".

That may just be journalistic licence. Given there hasn't been a Bill published yet, goodness knows what the end result will be.

If they're going to interlink anything, different flats in the same block would make most sense - there's not much to be gained from my interlinking detectors in my 2 bed flat* if I still don't know whether there's a fire downstairs.

* especially as I can already hear the existing detector from the opposite end of the flat...