How to choose someone for EICR testing? (and trust issues)

[Dace]

When you get an EICR for renting purposes a copy gets sent to the council. You cannot just get another more lenient one as the council will need proof the faults have been corrected.

House has never been rented before. Also even if they did request one and I did a 2nd one and got completely different results, I wonder what they would think.

So if I use a well rated company and they send a complete beginner with no experience I wouldn't know right?
Also if my wiring is from the 80s throughout the house am I probably going to have to rewire the whole damn house. I used it for a few years and the duse did trip a couple of times, no other signs of crackling etc

 

[JohnW2]

House has never been rented before. Also even if they did request one and I did a 2nd one and got completely different results, I wonder what they would think.

As I've said, one only has to send a copy of the EICR to the local authority if they "request it in writing", and I don't know how often (if ever!) that actually happens in practice - I suspect probably only if a tenant moans to them about something.

However, there is a problem with the (relatively new) legislation, even if/when a copy of the EICR(s) are not sent to the LA. With the legislation "as written", it would seem that the first EICR undertaken triggers a requirement (which could be enforced by LA,if they knew about it) to have any required remedial work (coded as C1 or C2) undertaken within 28 days - with no apparent provision to 'appeal' against the EICR or to have a second one undertaken (which will perhaps result in the requirement for less (maybe no!) remedial work.

In practice, and without knowing how 'legal' it is, I imagine that it comes down to a question of "who knows what". In other words, if a landlord feels that an initial EICR is unreasonable in the amount of remedial work that is required, he/she will probably tell no-one (not even the tenant) about that EICR, but will simply have a second (hopefully 'more favourable') one undertaken, and will then totally 'forget' about the first EICR (and never tell anyone about it.

As I say, I don't know how strictly legal that would be, but if the second (or subsequent!) EICR is a proper/legitimate one, I don't see why it should be regarded as any less valid than the initial one.

Kind Regards, John

 

[winston1]

Also if my wiring is from the 80s throughout the house am I probably going to have to rewire the whole damn house. I used it for a few years and the duse did trip a couple of times, no other signs of crackling etc

No.

Modern wiring has a long life, probably in excess of 100 years.

Fuses don’t trip, they rupture. I guess you have MCBs not fuses and hopefully at least one RCD. Any trips you experienced were probably due to appliances rather than wiring.

 

[Dace]

Tell the guy doing the eicr that you will not be placing any remedial work with him?

That could easily **** someone off and make them give be bullshit C2's+ out of spite. Becasue they can, they can act all fine in the phonecall and then screw me over and leacve laughing because the law is BS here.

Also seems that even without RCD's it's at most a C3. No need to update to Metal from the wylex, I don't need to meet 18th edition standards for the MCB. I will do it next 5 years because I want to when I have more money.

 

[JohnW2]

That could easily **** someone off and make them give be bullshit C2's+ out of spite.

There are two sides to that sword. If their understanding and belief is that they are going to be asked to do the remedial work resulting from every C2 they report, goodness know have many C2s an unscrupulous one might come up with! As I recently wrote, I would think that, in practice, anyone seeing what they believed to be 'bullshit C2s' (whether due to 'spite', attempts at work-generation or whatever) would (perhaps after initially attempting to 'challenge' them) get another EICR done. That's fair enough for someone (and you sound as if you are one) who has a reasonable ability to decide whether an EICR is "taking the pi$$', the real problem being for those (the majority of) people who don't have that ability.

As I said in response to dave's suggestion, what he suggested is precisely what we do when first employing an 'unknown' person to undertake an EICR. We explain that, in the case of the first two or three EICRs an individual does for us, it is our policy not to ask them to do any consequently required medial work, and ask if they are happy to undertake the EICR on that basis (with that knowledge) - and few, if any, have said 'no'. Admittedly, we can sweeten the situation by indicating that, if we are happy with the initial EICRs, there is the potential for there to be a lot of 'repeat business' from us (both EICRs and remedial work).

Also seems that even without RCD's it's at most a C3. No need to update to Metal from the wylex, I don't need to meet 18th edition standards for the MCB. I will do it next 5 years because I want to when I have more money.

You are talking about "how it should be" but don't forget that, in the almost total absence of any 'rules', and ridiculous though thios eems tonbe, it's entirely down to an EICR inspector's judgement as to whether a particular non-compliance (with current regulations) is 'potentially dangerous. Some certainly seem to believe (maybe even advised by their trade organisation)) that, in certain contexts, absence of required RCD protection should be C2, and some even seem to think that a plastic CU 'under the stairs' should be C2!

Kind Regards, John

 

[Dace]

Well that's the 2nd thing I'll ask before booking them then "do you consider wylex MCB's a C2?"

Thanks for the help all, I've got enough info on this now.

 

[JohnW2]

Well that's the 2nd thing I'll ask before booking them then "do you consider wylex MCB's a C2?"

Indeed. In fact, if you look around this and similar forums/for, you could find quite a lot of other very doubtful 'over-zealous' (in many people's minds) codings' which unfortunately seem quite common, and therefore you could probably put together a series of questions about 'how would you code XYZ' before you decided to engage someone to undertake an EICR. If they say that they would code, say, a plastic CU or the absence of 'required' labels as C2, then you probably would not need to ask any more

In fact, if they were 'co-operative' (and had nothing to hide!) you could even ask them if they could provide you will a copy of a recent EICR they'd done which has identified a number of C2s (obviously with customer identification information 'redacted') - so you could decide (either yourself, or by asking the likes of us) how reasonable those C2s appeared to be.

Good luck - and it would be good to hear how you get on.

Kind Regards, John

 

[crystal ball]

Its a lottery who you end up with, I have done a few follow ups for local schools after EICRs by the same local firm, every one contained falsifications, I don't think they expected someone to chase them, got them back to re test items and rectify faults on their own recent work.

 

[JohnW2]

Its a lottery who you end up with, I have done a few follow ups for local schools after EICRs by the same local firm, every one contained falsifications, I don't think they expected someone to chase them, got them back to re test items and rectify faults on their own recent work.

Quite so - which is why I keep saying that, particularly since legislation has given teeth to "landlord EICRs", I personally think that there is a need for some serious regulation of EICRs - particularly as regards who is allowed to do them (and who should, and who should not, continue to be allowed to do them)!

"By the same firm" obviously, in itself, means nothing (unless it's a one-man firm), since what matters is the individual.

I think what we do is about the best one can manage under current circumstances, although it requires one to have enough knowledge to be able to 'make judgements' about the EICRs - i.e. let a new person(individual, not firm) do two or three EICRs (or only one if it's really bad!) and then scrutinise what they have produced to decide how 'reasonable' one considers it to be.

Kind Regards, John

 

[cdbe]

You just need to find an honest reputable tradesman. There are some out there - usually found by word of mouth (as they won't need to advertise). Just the test and not the remedials can be a double edged sword - I had a guy a few years ago who just did the gas tests, nothing else (whizzed round in a little van and did quite a few in a day at a good price), problem came when he found a leak at the meter union - he passed the boiler but capped the supply - I then had to run around and find another gas engineer to fix that to keep the heating on - so at that point that didn't really work for me. What you going to do, say "I'll pay for the inspection and remedials up to fifty quid"?

I now have a gas engineer who I've become friends with (who does tests, servicing and repairs but won't sling boilers up), a nephew who's an electrician who will do work for me (but can't/won't certify anything because he works for a housing association), his dodgy ex boss who does a 10 minute EICR for £120, and a proper electrician (one of my kids football dad's) who will do a thorough and professional EICR for £170.

None of them are in the business of fabricating work.

 

[JohnW2]

You just need to find an honest reputable tradesman. There are some out there - usually found by word of mouth (as they won't need to advertise).

Sure, that's obviously what is needed and, as you imply, there are lots of them out there. Most of us say that the best thing to rely on are 'recommendations, but the problem with that is that the vast majority of "men/women in the street" understandably do not have the knowledge that would enable them to judge the technical competence (or honesty etc.) of an electrician who had undertaken an EICR or electrical work for them.

As a consequence, the great majority of people can only 'recommend' on the basis of things such as pleasantness, neatness, tidiness, punctuality, reasonableness (not 'cheapness') of charges etc., without having a clue as to whether work has been done safely/competently or whether an EICR had been produced properly, sensibly and honestly.

Just the test and not the remedials can be a double edged sword - I had a guy a few years ago who just did the gas tests, nothing else (whizzed round in a little van and did quite a few in a day at a good price), problem came when he found a leak at the meter union - he passed the boiler but capped the supply - I then had to run around and find another gas engineer to fix that to keep the heating on - so at that point that didn't really work for me. What you going to do, say "I'll pay for the inspection and remedials up to fifty quid"?

I was obviously talking about the situation in which it is the person commissioning the EICR (or 'gas test'), not the tradesman, had invoked the "Just the test and not the remedials" condition, and that could always be changed, on the spot, in a situation such as you mention. However, you seem to be talking about a situation in which you employed a person who (because it was their choice/wish) "just did tests" - and if one does that then one obviously has to accept that one will inevitably have to "run around and find another gas engineer" if remedial work is required!!

I now have a gas engineer who I've become friends with (who does tests, servicing and repairs but won't sling boilers up), a nephew who's an electrician who will do work for me (but can't/won't certify anything because he works for a housing association), his dodgy ex boss who does a 10 minute EICR for £120, and a proper electrician (one of my kids football dad's) who will do a thorough and professional EICR for £170.

The first and last of those are obviously what one wants and what one hopes to achieve once one has got to know a treades[person as his/her work.

None of them are in the business of fabricating work.

Fair enough - but, unfortunately, it seems that some do. Well, either that or they are either (a) totally incompetent or (b) are sufficiently lacking in confidence (with or without justification!) that feel the need to somehow 'protect their backsides' by regarding almost any non-compliance as "potentially dangerous", and hence C2!


Kind Regards, John

 

[Dace]

So I was hoping that this house would pass, but my guy wouldnt even do the EICR when he saw no covers on the MCB's and gaps in the plastic casing for the RCD's around the wires... Got a quote for £650, but a free EICR at least. Although also £180 for fitting and supply of 12 new lights in the kitchen. Seems expensive though! Got really old style lights in the kitchen that are a potential fire hazard... apparently.

 

[JohnW2]

So I was hoping that this house would pass, but my guy wouldnt even do the EICR when he saw no covers on the MCB's and gaps in the plastic casing for the RCD's around the wires... Got a quote for £650, but a free EICR at least.

What work was that quote for?

Although also £180 for fitting and supply of 12 new lights in the kitchen. Seems expensive though!

What would you expect? Even in terms of just 'supply', that only equates to £15 per light.

Someone will probably suggest that there is something 'wrong' (inappropriate for the purpose) with the lights if you need 12 of them to light one room

Got really old style lights in the kitchen that are a potential fire hazard... apparently.

I doubt that is true - but, without having seen them, I obviously cannot be sure.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

So if I use a well rated company

Well rated by whom?

 

[Taylortwocities]

Well rated by whom?

Checkatrade?