Electrical Certificate and My electrician

[deadshort]

Yes, now who's talking********s Sorry i could see that coming, clearly unnerved him haven't we

DS

 

[mpooley]

LABC were very helpful I was told to get a periodic inspection.
I have left message with a local electrician so hope to get an idea of costs soonish.
Could someone give me a ballpark figure for 1 ring main and 1 lighting cct please?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Basically he said he'd been an electrician for 12 years and everything said on here was *******s!

He is either an idiot or a liar.

He said it was an EIC that he was doing for me and that I had to pay £150.00 for it.

He is a thief.

Drop him in the s**t with his employer (I bet the test equipment was theirs), and complain to Trading Standards that he is doing work which does not comply with BS 7671 and therefore does likely not comply with the Building Regulations.

 

[mpooley]

Yeah I am very annoyed with the bugger but am a little hesitant to do that because he's a friend of my Nephew.
My Nephew is away on holiday until Saturday so he is blissfully unaware about all this.
I know he won't be pleased but....

 

[mpooley]

Update:
I Told the LABC and they were helpful I was told to go to the Elecsa website and get quotes for a Periodic inspection as they are happy to accept that.
I had one reply with a quote of £200 and another very nice guy who phoned to say that for what I needed I should go to the NAPIT website.
I have had another quote now for £85 which I is very reasonable.
Looks like I will go with that.
Thanks for your input it was much appreciated.

Mike

 

[riveralt]

Good to see things are working out.

It does seem that LABC's are taking a more pragmatic approach to this aspect of the Building Regulations.
Since most Schemes are not willing to complete third party inspections - the Electrical Installation Condition Report seems to be the solution to the problem.

 

[Taylortwocities]

Good to see things are working out.

It does seem that LABC's are taking a more pragmatic approach to this aspect of the Building Regulations.
Since most Schemes are not willing to complete third party inspections - the Electrical Installation Condition Report seems to be the solution to the problem.

The fly in that particular ointment is that there are no competence requirements for someone carrying out an EICR.
So any tom, diane or harry could sign off an EICR without being qualified in anything other than the ability to sign a name.

 

[JohnW2]

It does seem that LABC's are taking a more pragmatic approach to this aspect of the Building Regulations. Since most Schemes are not willing to complete third party inspections - the Electrical Installation Condition Report seems to be the solution to the problem.

Indeed - although I suppose this pragmatism is probably just 'realism' in these after-the-event situations. Short of the draconian step of insisting that the work was all ripped out and started again, I can't see there is any other approach they could take - even Third Party Certification cannot be legally utilised 'after the event'.

However, as TTC has said, one might expect that they might have some requirements (maybe they do?) in terms of who undertakes the EICR?

Kind Regards,
John

 

[mpooley]

I have just been reading another thread on here where someone has had a shower replaced and was expecting a certificate.
He was advised that, as it was just a replacement he wouldn't really need one just an EIC or MWC from the electrician.
It got me thinking ! (shouldn't do that!) my garage had a ring main with 5 sockets and a lighting cct with 3 lights.
would that mean it was only a replacement?

I am still going to get a periodic inspection but well just interested really.
Thanks

 

[JohnW2]

I have just been reading another thread on here where someone has had a shower replaced and was expecting a certificate. He was advised that, as it was just a replacement he wouldn't really need one just an EIC or MWC from the electrician. It got me thinking ! (shouldn't do that!) my garage had a ring main with 5 sockets and a lighting cct with 3 lights.
would that mean it was only a replacement? I am still going to get a periodic inspection but well just interested really.

Replacement, modification or extension of existing circuits is not usually 'notifiable', unless (in the case of modification/extension) it is in parts of a bathroom. Hence, although any electrical work should result in an EIC or MWC, the LABC would normally have no interest in any such work. The complication in this case seems to be that LABC are already 'involved', so that may be changing things - e.g. if the electrical work is part of a project (e.g. an extension) which requires Building Regs approval, they may 'take an interest' in the electrical work, even if it would not be notifiable if undertaken as 'standalone' electrical work. .

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Indeed - although I suppose this pragmatism is probably just 'realism' in these after-the-event situations. Short of the draconian step of insisting that the work was all ripped out and started again, I can't see there is any other approach they could take

Of course there is.

"We will not issue a Building Regulations completion certificate. Goodbye".

 

[ban-all-sheds]

if the electrical work is part of a project (e.g. an extension) which requires Building Regs approval, they may 'take an interest' in the electrical work, even if it would not be notifiable if undertaken as 'standalone' electrical work.

Of course, because, notifiable or not, compliance with the Building Regulations is mandatory, so if LABC are to issue a certificate saying that the extension complied they will want an assurance that the electrical work did.

 

[JohnW2]

if the electrical work is part of a project (e.g. an extension) which requires Building Regs approval, they may 'take an interest' in the electrical work, even if it would not be notifiable if undertaken as 'standalone' electrical work.

Of course, because, notifiable or not, compliance with the Building Regulations is mandatory, so if LABC are to issue a certificate saying that the extension complied they will want an assurance that the electrical work did.

Exactly.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Indeed - although I suppose this pragmatism is probably just 'realism' in these after-the-event situations. Short of the draconian step of insisting that the work was all ripped out and started again, I can't see there is any other approach they could take

Of course there is. "We will not issue a Building Regulations completion certificate. Goodbye".

I don't quite see how that "Goodbye" would work. It would leave LABC aware that regulated work had been undertaken without the necessary Buildings Control regulations having been satisfied (by issue of a Completion Certificate). If they were playing by the rules, they would/could not really just say "Goodbye" - they would either have to find some pragmatic approach which allowed them to issue a Completion Certificate or, as I suggested, taking the draconian step of requiring that all the work be 'undone'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[riveralt]

The fly in that particular ointment is that there are no competence requirements for someone carrying out an EICR.
So any tom, diane or harry could sign off an EICR without being qualified in anything other than the ability to sign a name.

I don't agree particularly since the LABC concerned pointed the OP to ELECSA - which shows that they require some form of Scheme involvement before signing off the Building Notice.
When I was with NAPIT, not only was there a pre-requisite for 2391 (or equivalent) and other C&G courses but we also need additional insurance before we could issue EICR's.