How long is warrantee for poor workmanship, is there any limit?

[ericmark]

I was looking at a post about no earth to light switch, in the main we can't claim for things like this as we simply don't know who did it, but today we issue installation certificates and the info is often held by LABC, so since around 2004 when Part P came in, we have records of who did the work.

Most tradesmen have insurance, and should something go wrong, the insurance should cover, but chatting to my son who was a sole trader around 2004, he has moved home three times since then, and has no idea who he was insured with.

The time for an EICR maximum is 10 years, so if a fault not reported in 11 years, then it should be the person doing the EICR, we have recalls with 10-year-old cars, so why not with electrical work in the home?

I was reading the thread "Metal light switch's with no earth" and it seems someone at some point did not follow the regulations, so not showing a warrantee of skill.

I was careful to issue installation or minor works certificates as it showed reading taken at the time, and if someone latter said it was wrong, I can show what I recorded at the time, but of course it is not proof.

If a fault is found in a month, one would expect it to be corrected FOC, but at what point, where it can be shown it was never right, is there a statue of limitation?

 

[Taylortwocities]

It depends on who did the work. For a NAPIT (etc) electrician it’s six years as follows

found on the NAPIT website.

SCOPE OF GUARANTEE

The Primary Guarantee is that, for a period of six years following installation, the tradesperson guarantees to return and rectify any non-compliance with the Building Regulations that relates to an incorrectly
completed installation carried out within the scope of their registration.

https://www.napit.org.uk/pdf/NAPIT_work_guarantee_terms_and_conditions_170518.pdf

Other craftspersons may include a warranty buried in their TandCs, or there may be some sketchy words if they were booked via MyBlunder, Chuck-A-Tribe, etc. so not a lot to fall back on, really. !

 

[plugwash]

and has no idea who he was insured with.

I suspect if he was staring down the barrel of a 5-6 digit court judgement he would become rather more motivated to find out.

 

[JohnW2]

I suspect if he was staring down the barrel of a 5-6 digit court judgement he would become rather more motivated to find out.

Maybe, but it's pretty unlikely that a court would be making a judgement today in relation to work undertaken 20 or so years ago, isn'tr it?

 

[plugwash]

Companies certainly can and do get ordered to pay compensation for things they did a long time ago, sometimes even if they were following what was accepted practice at the time. The amount of money involved in asbestos related claims was staggering and there are allegations that lloyds of london did some very dodgy things to avoid going broke.

According to https://www.netlawman.co.uk/ia/time-limits-claims "Claims relating to the quality of work in the construction of buildings may be made within 15 years of the fault becoming apparent." but something like a missing earth connection could easily go un-noticed for a very long time before becoming apparent.

I suspect the reality is that unless someone gets seriously injured or killed, the amounts of money involved in a "poor electrical work" case, the high likelyhood of a "he said, she said scenario" and the difficulty tracking down a tradesman make it difficult to bring a case, even if it is legally possible to do so..

 

[JohnW2]

.....According to https://www.netlawman.co.uk/ia/time-limits-claims "Claims relating to the quality of work in the construction of buildings may be made within 15 years of the fault becoming apparent." but something like a missing earth connection could easily go un-noticed for a very long time before becoming apparent.

I imagine that "the fauklt becoming apparent" refers to the pointin time at which the faults was first noticed/detectedor 'showed itself' in some way? If so, that presumably does not preclude a claim many decades after the work was done? However, as you go on to write ....

I suspect the reality is that unless someone gets seriously injured or killed, the amounts of money involved in a "poor electrical work" case, the high likelyhood of a "he said, she said scenario" and the difficulty tracking down a tradesman make it difficult to bring a case, even if it is legally possible to do so..

Quite so - and if, per title of this thread, the issue relates to "poor workmanship" (which presumably does not even necessarily anything specific to actually be 'wrong'), there will probably be lots of different opinions about that "workmanship".