Getting bathroom electrics signed off - After completion!

[Gingerbadger]

Hi All,
A friend of mine installed all the bathroom electrics in his new bathroom himself as a competent DIY-er.
This included re-wiring the light switch (replacing pull cord for standard switch outside), fitting a timer extractor fan to the light (with isolator) and installing a shaver socket off the lighting circuit.
Assuming this work was completed a while ago, say one year, how would he go about getting this work approved and signed off before selling the property.
Cheers

 

[Aragorn84]

Essentially he cant.

He could perhaps commission an EICR and hope that satisfies any prospective buyers?

We're currently buying a house, and in the process the solicitors/surveyors discovered the guy had fitted some sockets up in the loft which have no paperwork/documentation.

Our solicitor simply said that we could remove the sockets at our leisure (or have someone remove them before the sale completed), or leave them but with the knowledge that if we come to sell in future any prospective buyer might want them removed.

We chose to leave them be for now, and i'll probably take care of them at some point in the future when we're having other electrical work done.

 

[JohnW2]

We're currently buying a house, and in the process the solicitors/surveyors discovered the guy had fitted some sockets up in the loft which have no paperwork/documentation. Our solicitor simply said that we could remove the sockets at our leisure (or have someone remove them before the sale completed), or leave them but with the knowledge that if we come to sell in future any prospective buyer might want them removed.

That sounds like a far more sensible solicitor than most! They are compelled by the property information enquiry form (TA6) they use to ask whether any electrical work has been undertaken since 1.1.2005, but most of them haven't a clue what to say/do if the vendor answers 'yes' and indicates that it was DIY work and/or has no documentation and/or was not notified when it should have been.

In practice, despite all the scare stories, I don't think that such issues often have any significant impact on a sale. Let's face it, a buyer probably has more cause for concern if no electrical work has done since long before 2005! As with structural surveys, it is for the buyer to satisfy themselves (by comissioning an EICR) about the state of the electrical installation, if they so wish - and, IMO, there's no more reason for a vendor to pay for that than there is for them to pay for the buyer's structural survey.

Kind Regards, John

 

[plugwash]

AIUI from a building regs perspective there is a process called "regularisation", you pay a fee (higher than the normal notification fee) and then have to convince the building inspector that the work is up to standard (which may involve re-exposing things so he can see them) and he signs it off. Whether it's worth doing so for some fairly minor electrical work though is debatable.

 

[JohnW2]

AIUI from a building regs perspective there is a process called "regularisation", you pay a fee (higher than the normal notification fee) and then have to convince the building inspector that the work is up to standard (which may involve re-exposing things so he can see them) and he signs it off. Whether it's worth doing so for some fairly minor electrical work though is debatable.

Indeed - but, IMO, the worth is very debatable!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

most of them haven't a clue what to say/do if the vendor answers 'yes' and indicates that it was DIY work and/or has no documentation and/or was not notified when it should have been.

Think about using it a bargaining tool.

 

[JohnW2]

most of them haven't a clue what to say/do if the vendor answers 'yes' and indicates that it was DIY work and/or has no documentation and/or was not notified when it should have been.

Think about using it a bargaining tool.

That's the standard answer - but if I, or anyone like me, is on the vendor's side, the buyer is probably in for a big disappointment. As far as I am concerned, the asking price is decided on the basis of all known facts and issues. Of course, there may well be bargaining, anyway, and if it helps the buyer, or their solicitor, to believe that issues like past electrical work have influenced that bargaining process, then good luck to them - even though, if I were involved, that would not be the case!

As I said, I think the buyer would have far more cause for concern if they were told that no-one had been anywhere near the electrical installation for the past 10, 20 or whatever years - and I really don't think they can (or should) 'have it all ways'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[Graham3232]

My 'mate' fitted a new CU in his own house and asked me to 'sign it off'. I said I couldn't and also didn't want the risk. Anyway he sold a month later and the solicitor said he had to take a liability insurance on the electrics due to the 'missing' certificate. This cost £25 and the sale went through fine. The liability cover was for LABC trying to claim from non compliance etc.

It makes a mockery of the whole Part P compliance etc. Its cheaper to pay for liability insurance for non compliance for a few jobs than the registration fees

 

[JohnW2]

My 'mate' fitted a new CU in his own house and asked me to 'sign it off'. I said I couldn't and also didn't want the risk. Anyway he sold a month later and the solicitor said he had to take a liability insurance on the electrics due to the 'missing' certificate. This cost £25 and the sale went through fine. The liability cover was for LABC trying to claim from non compliance etc. It makes a mockery of the whole Part P compliance etc. Its cheaper to pay for liability insurance for non compliance for a few jobs than the registration fees

Indeed - but, of course, the reason why the insurance is so cheap (probably little more than the cost of administration) is that no-one seems to have heard of a single case of legal action being taken for non-notification of electrical work. It's therefore that lack of policing/ enforcement that was really the joke - but the system has now back-peddled so far (such that very little at all remains notifiable) that 't's almost become moot.

Kind Regards, John

 

[AllowAllGarages]

My 'mate' fitted a new CU in his own house and asked me to 'sign it off'. I said I couldn't and also didn't want the risk. Anyway he sold a month later and the solicitor said he had to take a liability insurance on the electrics due to the 'missing' certificate. This cost £25 and the sale went through fine. The liability cover was for LABC trying to claim from non compliance etc.

It makes a mockery of the whole Part P compliance etc. Its cheaper to pay for liability insurance for non compliance for a few jobs than the registration fees

That's indemnity, not liability and it's quite common and hence the low prices of such, rarely has any come backs.

 

[ericmark]

Because my parents were having work done by social services I wanted to keep the records correct for their house. I was worried that some jobs worth would refuse to do work because the paperwork was not in place.

But in actual fact it is the social services which have had work done without issuing certificates and it seems I am for ever chasing them for paperwork.

Even simple jobs seem to lack paperwork. Last job was to use existing wiring to put power to the door intercom which required a 12VDC supply. Because the electrician was unable to source a fixed DC supply he used a plug in DC supply and fitted a socket where the original AC transformer was.

Paperwork non existence. I would have expected a sticker saying for door bell only. As yet I have not checked or tested but I will. I expect to find no RCD protection as the 6A MCB has not been moved. Main reason for testing is originally it was Class II with no earth so want to insure it is earthed.

However if Flintshire County Council can't be bothered issuing paperwork why the heck should Joe Blogs worry?