Certifying work you did not do - Number 2

[IJWS15]

Saw some of "nw life - was it worth it" on Ch 5 the other night.

Couple had re-built a ruin and in the later stages mortgage extention was dependent upon electircal cert being issued (Bank requirement) and he called in an electrician to get one.
It was clear that the electrician had not done the install but a cert was forthcoming for the bank.

Are the rules different in Scotland???? If so I am delaring something like UDI and declaring my bit of Staffs part of Scotland!

 

[GaryMo]

Was the 'cert' not actually a certificate but a report on the installation (Periodic Inspection Report)?

 

[IJWS15]

It was a conversion from a ruin, effectively new installation, so cannot see it being a PIR.

Looks as if the building work was being done under BC supervision but the Bank asked for an electrical certificate and an electrician came in to do it. They did not show this but did show the owner running cables and fitting accessories, also he paid for the report so surely not a BC report.

 

[Chri5]

Sssh

I'm doing a job in Scotland at the moment and Part P doesn't cross pollinate with the Select scheme (Scot Part P).

Have agreed to do job, with a Scot Select member doing final sign off.

He interviewed me (and had sight of my certs), returned when the cabling was completed, will return when the 2nd fix is finalised and we're holding hands for some mutual testing.

It will be his 1st 17th ed installation

 

[GaryMo]

It was clear that the electrician had not done the install but a cert was forthcoming for the bank.

It was a conversion from a ruin, effectively new installation, so cannot see it being a PIR.

I can, unless he can get the original party to sign off as the designer and constructor with his name going down for inspection and testing.

Personally, I'd refuse to certify somebody elses work, all you'd get would be a PIR.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I'd never own up to a Number 2 that wasn't mine.

 

[roberta1000]

I do this sort of thing frequently - get someone else to do first fix then finish off myself or the other way around. I'm not usually around to 'supervise' things. Depends on your view of the other guy's competence surely. Doesn't everyone work like this?

 

[GaryMo]

I do this sort of thing frequently - get someone else to do first fix then finish off myself or the other way around. I'm not usually around to 'supervise' things. Depends on your view of the other guy's competence surely. Doesn't everyone work like this?

Nothing like that as long as the relevant designers, constructors and testers sign the EIC.

 

[DIYANIMAL]

we only offer a periodic unless we have been involved in the "design, erection and verification" of the job

AIUI, there is talk of banning this practise altogether, although it is just talk.

At then end of the day, if the place burns down or god forbid somebody gets a belt and is killed.....who they going to come looking for?

The bloke who signed to say it's safe.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

As long as you use inspection & test methods that comply with BS 7671, and you accurately record what you found and all the limitations, and plain English explanations for the client describing why anything needs fixing, then (assuming you actually know what you're doing, and don't f*** up) surely it's just like an MOT - a condition report, valid at the time it was issued, but with no guarantee that the car will remain compliant from that moment on?