Are the deaths from faulty appliances, faulty wiring or a combination of the two?.
The Hansard extract suggests that the figures are all
fatalities in the home attributed to electrical causes.
So allowing for the fact that Part P doesn't cover appliances, extension cords, or even a lot of work on fixed wiring, just what was it intended to achieve, given the very low figures before its introduction?
I'm not sure about deaths from fire attributed to electrical causes, but the overall fatality rate by electrocution in the U.K. is pretty low. The last figures I saw I think it was under 100 per year. Given that most of those deaths are from accidental contact with overhead lines, industrial shocks, and so on (i.e. all things which Part P doesn't cover anyway), the actual fatality rate from things which Part P would have prevented (if fully enforced) is absolutely minimal.
Has Part P really caused these deaths?.
I don't know, but it's interesting that the figures have increased noticeably since its introduction. I think we need to see how the figures go in another year or two.
Who inspects these deaths in the UK in a Domestic situation?.
that any deaths in the home would just be down to the local coroner (unless foul-play was suspected, of course, making it a police matter).
I take it that a lot of people in the UK hate rules and laws, for the sake of them.
It's certainly getting that way. Especially when people see the rules as being nothing more than an exercise in increasing bureaucracy and an excuse to extort more money in taxes and fees.
Don't forget that we've heard stories of some local councils charging over £200 for a Part P building regs. application.