Probably recommend, not make mandatory, if as shown in the post below, if it cannot be done well enough at a suitable cost/ value point for those at the bottom end of society- where does the  money to pay for this super service come from after all ?

Presumably something else is not happening instead, and it needs to be at least as valuable as that.

In the mix to be cut to make way for an EICR are checks of hot water systems, gas fittings, energy efficiency and lead and asbestos surveys, and that's before we get to heating bills, and economizing on food and clothing.

As a society we need to spend other people's money wisely.

Mike.

I beg to differ there Mike.  I think that social housing should be as safe as PRS housing.  An EICR is not a luxury item nor is Gas safety or is Legionnaires.

Social housing needs to factor in the build and running cost of these properties.  For me the running costs include the required safety testing.

But even if we cannot afford, and already do not seem able to afford actually, to provide enough social housing to meet demand? There has to be a cut off.

I am not convinced that drive by EICRs do anything at all for the safety of tenants in private rented property ether, and I'm old enough to recall an era pre gas safe checks, when the gas related accident rate was about the same as it is today but the cost was not there - the thing that has really fallen in the last 30 years is the no. of fires caused by smoking.

Mike,.

But even if we cannot afford, and already do not seem able to afford actually, to provide enough social housing to meet demand? There has to be a cut off.

I am not convinced that drive by EICRs do anything at all for the safety of tenants in private rented property ether, and I'm old enough to recall an era pre gas safe checks, when the gas related accident rate was about the same as it is today but the cost was not there - the thing that has really fallen in the last 30 years is the no. of fires caused by smoking.

Mike,.