Disciplinary Hearings - August 2022
The Board heard five disciplinary matters in May, four of which are detailed below. One of those resulted in the Board cancelling the registration and licence of an electrical worker.
Gary Sydney Charles Rossouw, Electrician, E 253305, EW 114517 of Gulf Harbour, Auckland
The Board heard two complaints about Mr Rossouw. In the first he was fined $2,000 and ordered to pay costs of $1,125. In the second, his licence and registration were cancelled for a period of five years, and he was ordered to pay costs of $1,125. The prescribed electrical work in the second matter was extremely poor and dangerous to persons and property.
Mr Rossouw did not appear at the hearings. He claimed that the complaints were vexatious and frivolous and that the Board did not have any jurisdiction referring to what is commonly known as a sovereign citizen argument. Mr Rossouw had previously been disciplined by the Board. On that occasion, he also claimed the complaint was vexatious and frivolous. The previous offending was an aggravating factor.
In both matters, Mr Rossouw refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing and did not engage with the Complainants to rectify safety issues.
Complaint Number CE22405
The Board found that Mr Rossouw had failed to provide a means of isolation for wiring and fittings supplying a lighting system and components, failed to provide residual current device (RCD) protection for new socket outlets in a bathroom, and had provided a false or misleading certificate of compliance.
Complaint Number CE22454
The prescribed electrical work in this matter was poorly completed and dangerous. The Board found that Mr Rossouw’s failings in this matter were fundamental to the point where his competence was called into question. There was scant regard for compliance requirements, and the Board questioned whether Mr Rossouw retained the knowledge or skill required to carry out the prescribed electrical work. The Board found that he was not only negligent in how he carried out the installation, but that he was also incompetent in respect of the failure to properly mount and secure photovoltaic (PV) solar array panels, the use of incorrect TPS cables to extend circuits from the PV array panels to the electrical equipment, the failure to provide mechanical protection on string wiring, to provide signs, labels and emergency shut down procedures, and to install a suitable device for a main isolating switch.
The full findings were that Mr Rossouw negligently created a risk of serious harm to any person, or a risk of significant property damage, in that he:
- Failed to ensure protective earthing bond to metallic frames of PV solar array panels;
- Installed distribution switchboard without an earthing system in part consisting of an earth electrode as listed in AS/NZS 4059:2011; and
- Failed to provide IP rating enclosures for batteries and electrical equipment.
The Board also found that Mr Rossouw carried out prescribed electrical work in a negligent and incompetent manner, in that he:
- Failed to properly mount and secure PV solar array panels;
- Used incorrect TPS cables to extend circuits from the PV Array panels to the electrical equipment;
- Failed to provide mechanical protection on string wiring (cables) from the PV array panels to the electrical equipment in the storage boxes;
- Failed to provide signs, labels and emergency shut down procedures as per AS/NZS5033:2012 and AS/NZS4509.1:2009; and
- Failed to install a suitable device for main isolating switch as per AS/NZS 60898.
Finally, the Board found that Mr Rossouw failed to provide certification.
A full copy of the decision and all other Board complaint decisions can be found at the following link:
The Board heard two other matters during its May 2022 meeting.
In the first matter, the electrical worker failed to provide a Certificate of Compliance and an Electrical Safety Certificate as required under the Safety Regulations. He was fined $500 and ordered to pay costs of $750. The electrical worker defended the matter.
In the second matter, which was also defended, the electrical worker carried out prescribed electrical work in a manner that was contrary to an enactment and in a negligent manner. He provided a false or misleading return. The negligence related to the failure to seal gaps for cable entry. The contrary to an enactment charge to the installation of a submain on a roof without adequate fixing and mechanical protection and the installation of extra-low voltage cables and low voltage cables within the same wiring enclosure without providing the required segregation or double insulation of the low voltage cables. The electrical worker was fined $1,000 and is ordered to pay costs of $500.
The electrical worker argued, amongst other things, that he carried out the installation to the standard within financial constraints that were imposed on him. The Board reminds electrical workers that whilst there can be commercial constraints, an electrical worker cannot contract out compliance requirements or claim that their obligations are in some way reduced because of commercial pressures. The work must be done to the required compliance standards regardless.