EICR - tester exceeding remit and the regs?

[R Benny Waered]

My EICR is not due till next year in a London property I rent out, but being a diligent landlord with tenants that are friends I decided to have the test done. a 20 yr old install and had already invested in replacing downlights with fire rated ones and added an RCD to the CU. But the spark that did this has failed the flat based on:

• Small gap between water pipes and ceiling (less fire resistance)
• Inadequate unlinked fire alarms (it has mains and battery backed linked smoke alarms on landings, and in-date. I also fitted a CO detector despite this not being regs and am investigating a whole of building system with the other property owners that is agreed in principle)
• Plastic CU in entrance hallway (above std wooden floorboards)
• Cracked fused spur

I'm good with the broken switch fail! All he does though is slag the install off and assume it wasn't done by an Englishman and he clearly has a political issue with properties being rented out. "£2k costs should take less than a week" was the vague excessive quote. 'Sell it if its too much money for you'. Very opinionated guy...but he does have diligence which is why I used him again... Arghh!

I have no issue doing essential works as per regs and improving things as time passes, but a £2k bill at a time where 70% of my income is disappeared is not good.

Should I just get another person to do a more balanced report and maybe seek recourse if you agree he has been in excess of the regs? Is a metal CU actually required retrospective fix for an RCD/MCB box?

Thanks

Benny

 

[EFLImpudence]

This subject is going to get done to death and thousands are going to be ripped-off.

Have a read https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/landlord-electrical-safety.550714/

 

[JohnW2]

My EICR is not due till next year in a London property I rent out, but being a diligent landlord with tenants that are friends I decided to have the test done. ...

EFLI has said it all, but ...

Small gap between water pipes and ceiling (less fire resistance)

In what sense is that anything to do with an EICR? If there are cables going through that 'small gap', it should surely say so.

Kind Regards, John

 

[R Benny Waered]

That thread is a bit inconclusive mate.

I'm really stuck here - is there a professional body I can speak to about this electricians actions? Or am I better employing another to do the EICR who plays with a straighter bat?

He is just costing time and has now said he may not be able to work on the property as i don't have an install certificate form 2020 from the developer. I suspect it thinks it was me and is 'punishing me' for a few (safe enough) anomalies but it wasn't - I lived there for 5 years having bought it off the developer.

This is a mess.

 

[R Benny Waered]

EFLI has said it all, but ...
In what sense is that anything to do with an EICR? If there are cables going through that 'small gap', it should surely say so.

Kind Regards, John

I know. I have no issue plastering the small gaps at all but he's given me a C2 fail. I have queried it but I get nowhere.

 

[EFLImpudence]

That thread is a bit inconclusive mate.

That is the position.
The law is very poorly written and open to (mis)interpretation.

I'm really stuck here - is there a professional body I can speak to about this electricians actions? Or am I better employing another to do the EICR who plays with a straighter bat?

If he is a registered electrician then you could contact the registration body - NICEIC, Elecsa, NAPIT etc.
You could ask him what floorboards have to do with anything. They are not exactly rare.

He is just costing time and has now said he may not be able to work on the property as i don't have an install certificate form 2020 from the developer. I suspect it thinks it was me and is 'punishing me' for a few (safe enough) anomalies but it wasn't - I lived there for 5 years having bought it off the developer.

I would definitely get someone else - he seems a right **** - but you may not be any better off.

This is a mess.

It is a mess.
Such is the incompetency of the English legislature.

You could complain to your M.P. if everyone did, they might get the message.

 

[JohnW2]

That thread is a bit inconclusive mate.

As EFLI implied, I fear this whole subject is going to be 'inconclusive' for a very long time, if not for ever. Well-intentioned though the new requirements are, they are going to create all sorts of problems, and 'rip-offs'.

I'm really stuck here - is there a professional body I can speak to about this electricians actions? Or am I better employing another to do the EICR who plays with a straighter bat?

You may well end up having to do the latter but does the paperwork indicate that the so-called electrician is a member of one of the trade bodies (such as 'NICIEC')? If so, there should be a complaints procedure accessible via the body's website, and that would be worth a try.

As you say, it's a mess (and not just for you). Good luck!

Kind Regards, John

 

[Diver Fred]

This subject is going to get done to death and thousands are going to be ripped-off.

Have a read https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/landlord-electrical-safety.550714/

EFL is so right. It's an atrocious piece of legislation (as is much of what is coming out Westminster at present) open to much self interest interpretation.

Afraid to say there is not much you can do other than get a second opinion. But please do post some pictures on here of what is the supposed failures.

Talking to the sparky chap who did my place (long life) battery smoke alarms are ok and not tested, only inspected for age - should be changed at about 7 years from installation (and no more than 10 years old). Mains powered one are tested.

 

[R Benny Waered]

I just spoke to another Sparkie near the property and he confirmed that all 3 issues are C3 recommendations not C2 fails. Rather than battling the original guy I'll pay the new one to do an EICR. I would like some payback for this original guy though as I paid him a not insignificant amount of money to mislead me - he's not a member of any trade body, sadly. I am as an accredited and licensed landlord who has mates in his flat but I think he hates us all! I shouldn't let it lie...

 

[ericmark]

Electricity is protentialy dangerous, so to say anyone is wrong issuing a C2 is hard. It is not made easier when the goverment definition of installation does not match the IET definition.

As to remit, I have done my inspection and testing course and it was all about electrical regulation I was no trained as a fireman, or plumber, and in essence if I find a C1 fault I must correct it before leaving, so I am not going to claim to test something I have no idea about and have not got the skill to fix.

If you want a fire safety report you get some one trained to do it, I work on a heritage railway and we have a number of electricians who volunteer, but only firemen we have light fires and keep them going, for fire safety we get an expert in.

And it has been pointed out not having new colours, or RCD may mean it does not comply with regulations for new builds, but it's not a new build.

 

[JohnW2]

Electricity is protentialy dangerous, so to say anyone is wrong issuing a C2 is hard.

I wouldn't say that it's at all hard if they are clearly wrong.

Kind Regards, John
Edit: crucial typo corrected!

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

I would say that it's at all hard if they are clearly wrong.

Kind Regards, John

wouldn't?

 

[ericmark]

I would say that it's at all hard if they are clearly wrong.

Kind Regards, John

Sorry looking at the English, if there was a definition that says and installation is considered not to be potentially dangerous if and some description then one can say exactly when it is or is not.

However there is no such description. Although if you look at automatic disconnection of supply, we have basic protection, and fault protection, the latter is normally provided by protective earthing, protective equipotential bonding, and additional protection is the RCD.

To read the regulations and laws it is not a knowledge of electricity that is required, but English. I have already got it wrong once, I thought I knew what was the installation and what was an appliance, but it seems in law a fixed appliance is part of the installation, how can you work when English is warped so much?

 

[RF Lighting]

Ask the electrician exactly which regulation(s) his flagged up issues do not comply with.

 

[RF Lighting]

Have a look at the electrical safety council’s best practice guide for EICRs

https://www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk/media/1200/best-practice-guide-4-issue-4.pdf

Particularly these two bits:

From the section code 3 defects: