Domestic Electrical Installation Condition Report

[Maggie1979]

I have no knowledge about electrics and I really need someone's help. My landlord is unfortunately one of those not really good ones. To the point that I had to take him to court as the condition of our property is beyond description. Electrics has been flooded on multiple occasions due to all sorts of leakages. Not long ago I asked my electrician to perform an installation check as that has never been done while I've been a tenant (over 8 years now). I can't say I have been surprised that the result was unsatisfactory. Some time later landlord sent his own electrician to put RCD on lights (that wasn't there), earth the gas etc. He then gave his own certificate stating that everything is ok and of course the result is satisfactory. My electrician came back just to double check the results and he discovered that the readings from landlord electrician on problematic circuits were completely different, than on his certificate (almost 10 times different). Insulation resistance readings by my electrician on live/live and live/earth were 2.6 and 0.34 and on landlord's electrician certificate were both 10. After double checking by my electrician his reading were showing again much lower resistance: 1.6 and 0.63. This readings differences are huge. What can I do with it as I'm scared about the condition of electrics in my house and I know my landlord will go to hell and back to get away with a murder.

 

[JohnW2]

This readings differences are huge. What can I do with it as I'm scared about the condition of electrics in my house and I know my landlord will go to hell and back to get away with a murder.

A sad tale. Given that, for the last year or so, there has been legislation relating to electrical safety (and certification thereof) in the private rental sector, one approach would be for you to contact the Housing Department of your local authority and tell them exactly what you have told us, expressing your concern about the electrical safety and asking for their advice.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Maggie1979]

John, thank you very much for your answer. Unfortunately our council is one of the worst ones in London. I had an environmental health visit at the end of March and to be fair I was shocked. The lady run through my house in about 20 minutes, didn't want to listen to the word I was saying, was so nice to my landlord yet not really nice to me. She pointed out only minor things and waved goodbye. More shocking was, that I have sent her Expert Witness Survey Report clearly stating that my house is not fit for human habitation. I'm not sure that, with this kind of their attitude I will achieve anything in my local council. Is there any other alternative, like getting another electrician opinion?

 

[JohnW2]

John, thank you very much for your answer. Unfortunately our council is one of the worst ones in London. I had an environmental health visit at the end of March and to be fair I was shocked. The lady run through my house in about 20 minutes, didn't want to listen to the word I was saying, was so nice to my landlord yet not really nice to me. She pointed out only minor things and waved goodbye. More shocking was, that I have sent her Expert Witness Survey Report clearly stating that my house is not fit for human habitation. I'm not sure that, with this kind of their attitude I will achieve anything in my local council.

Hmmm. That's certainly not a good start, and you have my sympathies

Is there any other alternative, like getting another electrician opinion?

Well, you're obviously free to get (and pay for) any electrician to undertake an EICR. In fact, your own electrician sounds reasonable, and it also sounds as if he may already have 'almost undertaken an EICR'.

However, if your landlord is going to ignore a further EICR and the LA are not going to be prepared to enforce the law on the landlord (on the basis on a new EICR), then I'm not sure that a new EICR would help you very much.

On the basis of what you have told us, it sounds as if the certificate provided by the landlord's electrician is 'incorrect', and maybe even 'fraudulent' and it could be that you would get somewhere with your LA if you could get them to understand that - since it is the sort of situation they are meant to be 'policing'.

If none of that works, particularly if you get a new EICR, then I would think your next step would probably be to get advice from a lawyer (or CAB) in relation to what would seem to be a failure of the LA to fulfil their duties in relation to electrical safety under the new legislation. Other possibilities might be your MP, or even the media!

Kind Regards, John

 

[Maggie1979]

John, again thank you for your answer. I don't mind paying for new EICR as my family's safety is priceless. My electrician already did one and some time after that, my landlord's electrician came and did whatever he did. As they both NICEIC certified, my electrician told me that, he can't get involved too much as the governing body is refusing to help (he spoke to his inspector about that matter) as it would mean that they going to have a case against themselves for allowing this kind of people to be certified by them. Makes and at the same time doesn't make sense in a way...
I will obtain another independent EICR and if it will confirm my electrician's findings I will email my council and force them to act on it.

 

[blup]

Did the respective electricians carry out the IR test at different voltages and would this account, at least in part, for the disparity between the readings?

Blup

 

[Maggie1979]

Did the respective electricians carry out the IR test at different voltages and would this account, at least in part, for the disparity between the readings?

Blup

Both did at the same one: 500 volt

 

[JohnW2]

John, again thank you for your answer. I don't mind paying for new EICR as my family's safety is priceless. My electrician already did one and some time after that, my landlord's electrician came and did whatever he did. As they both NICEIC certified, my electrician told me that, he can't get involved too much as the governing body is refusing to help (he spoke to his inspector about that matter) as it would mean that they going to have a case against themselves for allowing this kind of people to be certified by them. Makes and at the same time doesn't make sense in a way...

I'm not so sure about the 'sense'. I can understand that no-one other than the person who commissioned the work (i.e. the landlord), or perhaps also the LA, could pursue with NICEIC a complaint about the actions of one of their members.

However, I don't see any reason why anyone else (even another NICEIC member, such as your electrician) cannot undertake a further EICR and simply honestly report what they find - without any reference to anything that had happened previously (an EICR is, after all, simply a report of the 'Condition' of the electrical installation at the time inspected/tested, regardless of anything else).

I will obtain another independent EICR and if it will confirm my electrician's findings I will email my council and force them to act on it.

Quite so. If, regardless of anything/everything which has gone before, a current EICR shows that the installation is 'unsatisfactory' (any issues 'coded' as C1 or C2), then that wiould be a clear indication that the landlord was in breach of the legislation, which requires ..

... 3.—(1) A private landlord(1) who grants or intends to grant a specified tenancy must—
(a)ensure that the electrical safety standards are met during any period when the residential premises(2) are occupied under a specified tenancy;

As those charged with 'policing' that legislation, the LA are essentially obliged to address that - firstly by requiring that the landlord undertakes the necessary remedial word, secondly by issuing a 'Remedial Notice' if he doesn't and, finally, by themselves arranging to have the remedial work undertaken and then recovering the cost from the landlord.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Alec_t]

If/when you contact the council it wouldn't hurt to quote chapter and verse of the legislation and remind them of their legal responsibility. If that fails to get things sorted then, as suggested above, contact your MP. In my experience (two occasions) a letter from an MP triggered corrective action.

 

[ericmark]

As an owner occupier I don't really understand the rental housing market, my first reaction is why not move? Clearly something which I don't understand.

However I have test meters give wrong readings, and also seen testers use odd methods, what I or non any one else on the forum does not know is which report is wrong.

It is very easy to jump to conclusions which are wrong, I have done this far too many times.

500Ω was at one time a pass, and with any SPD or scokets with other electronic bits, tests should be at 250 volt.

The testing of SPD using a wind up insulation tester was interesting, A very small diffrence in the test voltage can cause a huge diffrence in reading.

There is no requirement to treat the home as a new installation, BS 7671 is not retrospective, so unless there has been a change then if it was OK when installed it is still OK now.

Yes I think all homes should be RCD protected, and clearly your landlord agrees, but he is not forced by law to fit them. I think we would all like some things to be retrospective, but the new landlord law is very vague, it says BS7671:2018 should be followed but BS7671:2018 gives the design date after which it applies, and so directs one to an earlier edition.

This clearly has to be the case, half way through a 4 year building erection you can't expect designers to re-design it, and BS7671 is not only domestic.

 

[JohnW2]

If/when you contact the council it wouldn't hurt to quote chapter and verse of the legislation and remind them of their legal responsibility.

In addition to the bit of the legislation I quoted above, seemingly very pertinent to what you say is this (and what follows it) ..

Duty of local housing authority to serve a remedial notice
4.—(1) Where a local housing authority has reasonable grounds to believe that, in relation to residential premises situated within its area, a private landlord is in breach of one or more of the duties under regulation 3(1)(a), (1)(b), (1)(c), (4) and (6), and the most recent report under regulation 3(3) does not indicate that urgent remedial action is required, the authority must serve a remedial notice on the private landlord.
(2) A remedial notice must— .... , items (a) to (g) ....
(3) The local housing authority must serve a remedial notice within 21 days beginning with the day on which the authority decides it has reasonable grounds under paragraph (1).

.... although I really do not understand (my emphasis) "... and the most recent report under regulation 3(3) does not indicate that urgent remedial action is required, ...." It surely would make much more sense without that 'not', wouldn't it?

Kind Regards, John

 

[blup]

I think the “not” must be for non urgent situations, where 21 days is given to comply, and maybe a right to appeal. The rules presumably allow for Councils to serve an emergency notice with immediate effect for C1 type situations, where there is no right for the landlord to drag things out at the expense of the tenants safety.

Blup

 

[ericmark]

I think the “not” must be for non urgent situations, where 21 days is given to comply, and maybe a right to appeal. The rules presumably allow for Councils to serve an emergency notice with immediate effect for C1 type situations, where there is no right for the landlord to drag things out at the expense of the tenants safety.

Blup

Is an inspector permitted to leave site with an unresolved code C1? Even if simply isolated I would think not? So if a Council had to serve an emergency notice with immediate effect, there would be a lot more going on at the same time, for one the Council would need to find alternative accommodation for the tenant, and also one would hope if an inspector had missed a C1 likely court proceedings would be started against the inspector.

I do see a problem when unlike the car MOT anyone can simply say I know what I am doing so I will do inspections, "“qualified person” means a person competent to undertake the inspection and testing required under regulation 3(1) and any further investigative or remedial work in accordance with the electrical safety standards;" and a private landlord must "3(1)(b)ensure every electrical installation in the residential premises is inspected and tested at regular intervals by a qualified person;" so it is down to the landlord to ensure the inspector is qualified, do remember it is not possible to have an illegal contract in law, so if the person is not qualified no insurance will cover.

If the C&G2391 (qualification considered required to do inspection and testing) like a driving licence could be revoked, then the authorities could stop him doing inspections easily, but to stop some one trading they would need a court order, and I can't see that happening in a hurry. On the few times there have been court cases one it is after a death, not a simple report of bad practice, and to it was the landlord and the electrician who were jailed, which clearly stopped the electrician for a year, but reading the report there were many faults including theft.

So one is left with one inspector says OK and the other not OK, so to resolve the issue the next inspector needs to be more qualified than the two who have already given their opinion. And when my son pointed out the problem to our local council in that their inspector would need to be higher qualified than me to be able to over ride my opinion they backed down. They had not side anything wrong, they just wanted me to pay for an independent inspector.

So down to nitty gritty, if council says this must be done, and if not we will do it and charge the landlord, which it seems is an option, can the landlord say sorry I have had enough, they can find another home I am selling up? It would depend on the contract of course, but when it came to working out what to do with my mothers old house, rent or sell, I looked at all the laws to rent, and said forget that for a lark.

My son decided he would rent his old house, and he is paying more in mortgage repayments than he is getting in rent. So until mortgage is paid off, he is losing money. However in many cases the landlord can have a mortgage and still make money, and you ask the question if a mortgage is less than the rent, why rent? In the main two reasons, one is it is temporary, my wife rented when living in London as she knew the job was temporary, or they can't get a mortgage, if they can't get a mortgage then if may be due to some past event like being bankrupt, but also could be they don't have the income large enough, so a landlord is taking a risk in that he may not get the rent. OK not quite that simple, I know with my mother because the house was hers, getting help from council was limited, and they could basely lend her the money she needed to live then sell the house on her death to settle the account. Hence why the special mortgages to release money tied up in ones home, it is a way of getting around having to pay for living in a retirement home. However can give the home away to children anyway, as long as they don't become bankrupt.

But there is a lack of rental accommodation, and this is why the Welsh government has not followed the English lead, they are worried that making it harder to rent out will reduce to homes for rent and increase the number of homeless. And when you hear about people fighting to get landlords to fix things rather than moving to a home with better landlord it seems to reinforce the idea there is a lack of homes to rent.

So there has to be a balance, complain too much, and landlord may simply say enough is enough, unless the contract stops him.

 

[blup]

I imagine situations arise where the local authority housing inspector identifies a problem and issues a notice which is effective immediately, and a third party electrician is brought in to resolve the issue at the landlord's expense.

Blup

 

[SUNRAY]

... but when it came to working out what to do with my mothers old house, rent or sell, I looked at all the laws to rent, and said forget that for a lark.

My son decided he would rent his old house, and he is paying more in mortgage repayments than he is getting in rent. So until mortgage is paid off, he is losing money. However in many cases the landlord can have a mortgage and still make money, and you ask the question if a mortgage is less than the rent, why rent? In the main two reasons, one is it is temporary, my wife rented when living in London as she knew the job was temporary, or they can't get a mortgage, if they can't get a mortgage then if may be due to some past event like being bankrupt, but also could be they don't have the income large enough, so a landlord is taking a risk in that he may not get the rent. OK not quite that simple,...

Has your son spoken to his mortgage company and got their permission to rent out?

I started into renting out with inheriting my parents house but ours was a funny case, a developer wanted to apply for permission to build a supermarket and needed a maximum of 2 year commitment to sell (at a fixed and a little generous price) if permission was granted. My Father and one other in the developement had not signed and we stood a poor chance of selling in the situation. The agent dealing with the negotiations are also letting agents and it made total sense to sign the developement agreement and let them handle the short term rental in the meantime.

The supermarket didn't happen (a competing application across the road did) and 28 years on we're still raking in the money.
In the meantime I had an assessment by an independant financial advisor for taking out a private pension, seeing a couple of endowment policies (used for a previous home) he suggested I used them for a B2L mortgage to purchase a rental property.

One of the conditions of the mortgage being that the rent had to be at least double the mortgage payment.

I purchased 3 one bed flats over 16 months with 25 year mortgages. The last of the mortgages was paid off within 11 years and there was still 3 years on one of the endowments.

Where I am now - 4 properties, no debts, fully paid for themselves, paying a decent pension, I have to cut some grass every month otherwise ocassional visits and of course sorting between tenants.

The pension... what an absolute waste of space that was. It has cost me a little over what another mortgage would have and the annual pension is what I get in 2.5 months rent... do I have regrets? For buying property, no regrets. For buying a pension, Yeah to right I do.

However I did look at buying more as the mortgages finished and the figures didn't stack up in the same way, property prices had gone up to 4 times and the rents by 2 times but at least the mortgage interest was down by two thirds.