eicrs mandatory in let properties in Scotland
- Thread starter asc
- Start date
Sponsored Links
It is happening under the Housing (Scotland) Act 2014
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2014/14/section/23/enacted
as far as I can see, at the moment:
- Any new tenancy from 1 December 2015 must have an Electrical Installation Condition Report (EICR)
- Any exisiting tenancy must have an EICR by 1 December 2016, so there will be a 1 year period to bring exisiting tenancies up to standard.
- An EICR which complies with BS7671, completed by a competent person, since 1 January 2012 will be acceptable.
- An EICR completed on, or after, 1 December 2015 must have additional documents to show a record of appliances checked and any remedial work undertaken, but these additional documents won’t be required if the EICR was completed earlier.
- An ongoing duty to renew EICRs every 5 years. (Ardanach Lettings)
however I'm not sure if this is still a proposal or actually in force through a commencement order / Ministers guidance.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2014/14/section/23/enacted
as far as I can see, at the moment:
- Any new tenancy from 1 December 2015 must have an Electrical Installation Condition Report (EICR)
- Any exisiting tenancy must have an EICR by 1 December 2016, so there will be a 1 year period to bring exisiting tenancies up to standard.
- An EICR which complies with BS7671, completed by a competent person, since 1 January 2012 will be acceptable.
- An EICR completed on, or after, 1 December 2015 must have additional documents to show a record of appliances checked and any remedial work undertaken, but these additional documents won’t be required if the EICR was completed earlier.
- An ongoing duty to renew EICRs every 5 years. (Ardanach Lettings)
however I'm not sure if this is still a proposal or actually in force through a commencement order / Ministers guidance.
I'm a bit confused by Scottish Law! ...
Since this Act, which specifies specific 'compliance dates' (1st December 2015/2016), has already received Royal Assent, is it really necessary for anything else to happen for that Act to "be in force"?
Kind Regards, John
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 23,668
- Reaction score
- 2,667
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
The Scottish Ministers must publish guidance on the carrying out of inspections.
Any idea where one can find that guidance? Should be an interesting read.
Any idea where one can find that guidance? Should be an interesting read.
Sponsored Links
Apologies - I made the mistake of assuming that the dates quoted by OwainDIYer came from the Act - but, as I presume you have discovered, that is not the case. In fact, all the Act says is:
... so it's a question of whether or not the Minsiters have yet decreed and, if so, what they have decreed about implementation/compliance dates. Maybe Owain can help.
Kind Regards, John
Are tenants in Scotland dropping like flies or is this a typical bureaucratic solution to a problem that does not exist.
Will it result in -
Your installation and appliances have been thoroughly inspected.
That's £250 please.
Here is the report with improvements required which will be another £200.
or -
Put your name and address on this worthless piece of paper to cover your arse.
That's £50 please.
Please be quick; I have seven more to do today.
Oh. Where's my socket and see tester?
Will it result in -
Your installation and appliances have been thoroughly inspected.
That's £250 please.
Here is the report with improvements required which will be another £200.
or -
Put your name and address on this worthless piece of paper to cover your arse.
That's £50 please.
Please be quick; I have seven more to do today.
Oh. Where's my socket and see tester?
There's no mention of EICR's in the link/legislation (only the repairing standard), although an 'inspection scope' EICR (plus PAT) would seem to be the obvious route to comply with the legislation. Additionally there's no mention of testing (only 'inspection', repeatedly) and as such it seems likely that ELFI's 2nd scenario seems rather more likely than the first.
Reputable letting agents have been insisting on 'electrical reports' for some time now, but these invariably seem to fall far short of a full EICR.
Reputable letting agents have been insisting on 'electrical reports' for some time now, but these invariably seem to fall far short of a full EICR.
Hmmmm... I wonder when they'll start telling landlords about this.
I have to pay a mandatory £55 "Landlord registration fee" every year for which I get precisely nowt in return - no guidance or updated legislation.
Oh well, I grumpily accept that getting an EICR done on the flat isn't a terrible idea and I'm sure there are a lot of dodgy electrics in rented properties.
I have to pay a mandatory £55 "Landlord registration fee" every year for which I get precisely nowt in return - no guidance or updated legislation.
Oh well, I grumpily accept that getting an EICR done on the flat isn't a terrible idea and I'm sure there are a lot of dodgy electrics in rented properties.
That's an interesting point and, in the apparent absence of any definitions in this Act (maybe they exist in "the 2006 Act", which I haven't looked at?) one cannot tell what the legal interpretation would be - and, if there are no definitions, it will presumably be down to 'the Ministers' to determine the nature and scope of the required 'inspection'.
However, I don't think it goes without saying that, when the answer is determined or discovered, 'inspection' necessarily precludes a requirement for 'testing'. I know 'inspectors' who undertake 'inspections' in safety-critical engineering fields, and the 'inspections' they undertake involve a lot of measuring, and often more sophisticated things like X-ray and ultrasound 'examinations'.
I suppose the question for most of us is when this is going to slip south of the border - 'electrical inspections' (of whatever nature) for rented property have certainly been 'threatened' in E&W for a long time. As EFLI has said, what, if anything, they will achieve is more questionable - although they presumably/hopefully will detect the more terrible/ frightening of the electrical installations out there.
Kind Regards, John
If we replace the "electrical" with "GAS" do we meet the same level of resistance(no pun intended) to inspection and testing, I think not ……. both have the potential ( no pun intended ) to kill.
Regards,
DS
It's not resistance; it's whether it's necessary...
Is the answer -
a. No
or
b. No
...and whether it will be done properly.
Is the answer -
a. No
or
b. No
Is the answer -
a. No
or
b. No
...and whether it will be done properly.
Is the answer -
a. No
or
b. No
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 23,668
- Reaction score
- 2,667
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
My son got a job travelling to sites to inspect and test. They did not tell him to cheat but the times given hardly covered travelling time never mind the testing it was a case of a role of ready printed pass labels and he got out of the job as quick as he could.
It would seem they had a high turn over of staff and their excuse when something was passed when it should have failed was always we have let that guy go it will not happen again.
In the main my PAT testing was an odd item which had been repaired but I was sent to a workshop and office so I decided to go for it and see how many I could do with my Robin top of the range tester. All tests had to be done for every item as it recorded the item number so a computer with a power lead had to be tested twice even though clearly if computer passed so did power lead.
I was surprised how few I did in 6 hours. By time the tester had booted up and tested the socket before it would allow me to start and then it went through the pre-set time for each test it took 6 minutes on average slightly longer with class I 110 volt and shorter with Class II 230 volt but at 6 minutes a test that's only 80 items per day. Using manual PAT tester I was far faster more like 4 minutes but I have seen where 250 items have been tested in a day that's less than 2 minutes an item I could only do that if the tester was static and all items brought to me.
Unlike the fixed installation it is easy to see with PAT testing that where 250 items a day have been tested then either all Class II or some cheating has gone on. But to be fair if doing it every day one gets a feel for the items which need the full test.
Where it all goes wrong is like when I was in University working on AB PLC's and the paper work asked for me to list any health and safety issues which I did. The cooling holes were too big to comply with the IP rating requirements and there was no tool required to access 230 vac connections there was a warning with the units that they were designed to be mounted inside a panel and were not stand alone units. I quoted BS7671 regulation numbers and AB instruction numbers so it was rather cut and dried no real way to say I was wrong.
However these stand alone units had been PAT tested for 5 years once a year passing every time. UPs! This is what happens when semi-skilled are used to PAT test.
As I said easy to see with PAT testing but the same is true for installation testing. To test all one should if following what is taught when one takes the C&G 2391 then it would take a long time to fully test a house.
The question is of course how much is really required? Test the ring is a ring do an insulation test is all possible from the consumer unit. A loop impedance for some where need centre of ring and test the RCD and really that's all it requires. Inspection will be enough for the rest.
I have read some of the test reports. MCB's not labelled was down on one and my question was why did he not label them while testing but he was only doing testing and inspecting fixing labels is a repair.
I found one cable went to a broken junction box in loft and that was also raised why was there no report. Answer it was reported there were no labels so did not know where it went. Had the same with asbestos found in fuse box. Once found that was end of testing needs fixing before testing is continued.
I would renew all rewire-able fuses that's really the only way to know they are the right size. But again I have seen a report "Fitted with rewire-able fuses" so what nothing wrong with them it's not a fault where an instructed person is on site.
The list goes on. Which is why I said.
With out that publication the law is useless.
It would seem they had a high turn over of staff and their excuse when something was passed when it should have failed was always we have let that guy go it will not happen again.
In the main my PAT testing was an odd item which had been repaired but I was sent to a workshop and office so I decided to go for it and see how many I could do with my Robin top of the range tester. All tests had to be done for every item as it recorded the item number so a computer with a power lead had to be tested twice even though clearly if computer passed so did power lead.
I was surprised how few I did in 6 hours. By time the tester had booted up and tested the socket before it would allow me to start and then it went through the pre-set time for each test it took 6 minutes on average slightly longer with class I 110 volt and shorter with Class II 230 volt but at 6 minutes a test that's only 80 items per day. Using manual PAT tester I was far faster more like 4 minutes but I have seen where 250 items have been tested in a day that's less than 2 minutes an item I could only do that if the tester was static and all items brought to me.
Unlike the fixed installation it is easy to see with PAT testing that where 250 items a day have been tested then either all Class II or some cheating has gone on. But to be fair if doing it every day one gets a feel for the items which need the full test.
Where it all goes wrong is like when I was in University working on AB PLC's and the paper work asked for me to list any health and safety issues which I did. The cooling holes were too big to comply with the IP rating requirements and there was no tool required to access 230 vac connections there was a warning with the units that they were designed to be mounted inside a panel and were not stand alone units. I quoted BS7671 regulation numbers and AB instruction numbers so it was rather cut and dried no real way to say I was wrong.
However these stand alone units had been PAT tested for 5 years once a year passing every time. UPs! This is what happens when semi-skilled are used to PAT test.
As I said easy to see with PAT testing but the same is true for installation testing. To test all one should if following what is taught when one takes the C&G 2391 then it would take a long time to fully test a house.
The question is of course how much is really required? Test the ring is a ring do an insulation test is all possible from the consumer unit. A loop impedance for some where need centre of ring and test the RCD and really that's all it requires. Inspection will be enough for the rest.
I have read some of the test reports. MCB's not labelled was down on one and my question was why did he not label them while testing but he was only doing testing and inspecting fixing labels is a repair.
I found one cable went to a broken junction box in loft and that was also raised why was there no report. Answer it was reported there were no labels so did not know where it went. Had the same with asbestos found in fuse box. Once found that was end of testing needs fixing before testing is continued.
I would renew all rewire-able fuses that's really the only way to know they are the right size. But again I have seen a report "Fitted with rewire-able fuses" so what nothing wrong with them it's not a fault where an instructed person is on site.
The list goes on. Which is why I said.
With out that publication the law is useless.
And for a school, college, factory or warehouse... even longer!
An EICR is not carried out in the same was as initial testing and can be done quite a bit faster, but one should not claim it is being done improperly without understanding the difference.
Though that said there are some out there who will simply have a brief look around and copy out the previous test sheets and miss 95% of the defects.
When presented with an EICR schedule glance at the IR results first, if you have a 16way TPN board with every circuit stated as ">200" or a result entered in L-N insulation for anything but straightforward radial circuits then you know its probably not worth the paper its written on
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 23,668
- Reaction score
- 2,667
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
I do think where previous test results are compared with new results as with in house testing a simple loop impedance can high light 45% of faults with the inspection finding 54% of remaining. L-N and L-E of course but a reading of 1.23Ω means nothing unless you know what the reading should be.
Because we are so worried about cheats we tend not to give the tester previous readings except with in house testing.
Look as the ESC web site and they show recording a fault where a single socket has many extension leads plugged into it. Personally I can't see how that makes the slightest difference to if the installation is safe or not. It would mean failing an installation because at the time of visit builders were in and had heat lamps to dry plaster.
As it stands there are it would seem many personal ideas of what passes and what fails. To me putting in notes that socket was found with too much weight handing from it is fair comment or even adaptor was found unfused allowing more than 13A to be drawn from socket is fair comment but if one is testing the fixed installation than that's all one is testing.
That is the all important document. This document must define exactly what is included and what is not included.
Shown is a compliant and non compliant adaptor would we need to search the house for non compliant?
of three only one complies. But likely adaptors like these will not belong to landlord so can one remove them or is that theft?
Take a frost free freezer or a washing machine and to test either a tester would have to be left connected for an extended time or the appliance would need some dismantling. In the main we test neutral - earth insulation and hope this will highlight faults but once it becomes a legal thing then some one will have to say exactly what to test. Personally if earth is sound then that's good enough any fault will operate the RCD.
With Class II equipment there is very little other than a careful look which can be done plugging into a PAT tester only reading is how much power it uses. And Class III even worse and I know many firms don't test Class III items.
There is at the moment some common sense used about what should and what is unnecessary to test. I would never miss testing earth continuity with a oil filled radiator as so many I have tested have been faulty. With a desk fan where to test earth the only thing one can connect to is the shaft driving fan and at 25 amp it may damage bearings missing out the test is no real problem.
We as electricians use our knowledge and common sense but once it's a legal requirement like a car MOT we will need to follow the manual issued by the government to the letter. Common sense will go out of the window and like the gas fitters if the hob extractor is 1/2 inch too close to the hob then it's a fail even if fitted with an induction hob where there is no heat from the rings.
Where the problems start is like when I worked in Suffolk one finds a house designed for migrant workforce in the one I went to it was American forces with 110 volt sockets but could just as easy be German CEE 7/4 sockets at the moment we can enter it in the deviations from BS7671 but it is still allowed. It complies with an EU standard even if not British standard and as long as protected by 16A trips it's OK.
BS7671 is not law but can be used in a court of law so we don't have to comply. But if it became law then it would really make life difficult. With car MOT's the government wrote the regulations from scratch it states exactly how much free play in a king pin per inch diameter and when LED lamps came in within the year new rules had to be made to cater for their use. Can you think about how much light would come from a 60W main beam head lamp?
So no longer could the government expect the IET/BSi to write the regulations they would need to take over that job. Oh what a tangled web!
Because we are so worried about cheats we tend not to give the tester previous readings except with in house testing.
Look as the ESC web site and they show recording a fault where a single socket has many extension leads plugged into it. Personally I can't see how that makes the slightest difference to if the installation is safe or not. It would mean failing an installation because at the time of visit builders were in and had heat lamps to dry plaster.
As it stands there are it would seem many personal ideas of what passes and what fails. To me putting in notes that socket was found with too much weight handing from it is fair comment or even adaptor was found unfused allowing more than 13A to be drawn from socket is fair comment but if one is testing the fixed installation than that's all one is testing.
That is the all important document. This document must define exactly what is included and what is not included.
Take a frost free freezer or a washing machine and to test either a tester would have to be left connected for an extended time or the appliance would need some dismantling. In the main we test neutral - earth insulation and hope this will highlight faults but once it becomes a legal thing then some one will have to say exactly what to test. Personally if earth is sound then that's good enough any fault will operate the RCD.
With Class II equipment there is very little other than a careful look which can be done plugging into a PAT tester only reading is how much power it uses. And Class III even worse and I know many firms don't test Class III items.
There is at the moment some common sense used about what should and what is unnecessary to test. I would never miss testing earth continuity with a oil filled radiator as so many I have tested have been faulty. With a desk fan where to test earth the only thing one can connect to is the shaft driving fan and at 25 amp it may damage bearings missing out the test is no real problem.
We as electricians use our knowledge and common sense but once it's a legal requirement like a car MOT we will need to follow the manual issued by the government to the letter. Common sense will go out of the window and like the gas fitters if the hob extractor is 1/2 inch too close to the hob then it's a fail even if fitted with an induction hob where there is no heat from the rings.
Where the problems start is like when I worked in Suffolk one finds a house designed for migrant workforce in the one I went to it was American forces with 110 volt sockets but could just as easy be German CEE 7/4 sockets at the moment we can enter it in the deviations from BS7671 but it is still allowed. It complies with an EU standard even if not British standard and as long as protected by 16A trips it's OK.
BS7671 is not law but can be used in a court of law so we don't have to comply. But if it became law then it would really make life difficult. With car MOT's the government wrote the regulations from scratch it states exactly how much free play in a king pin per inch diameter and when LED lamps came in within the year new rules had to be made to cater for their use. Can you think about how much light would come from a 60W main beam head lamp?
So no longer could the government expect the IET/BSi to write the regulations they would need to take over that job. Oh what a tangled web!
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
