davezawadi (David Stone):
There is a problem here. If the tenant does not want any work carried out (QUITE REASONABLY) then the landlord or contractor has no right to do so. Entry to the tenants home is restricted to a very limited range of actions, and moving the contents about is not one of them, or causing disruption to the tenants' legitimate activities (such as working from home) either. The decorations and room finish form part of the rental contract, so trunking may not be fitted without permission of the tenant, who objects. The law is badly drafted and does not explain how this requirement can be met with sitting tenants. The options offered above would be fantastically expensive (thousands of pounds) so are not practical. No court would convict this Landlord John, and a council would not issue an enforcement notice because they would have to deal with the tenant and their property, and they plead poverty. The LAW is simply BAD. The earth wire provides no additional safety in this installation, so its lack cannot be considered potentially dangerous. It must get a C3, at least until the tenant changes.
The legal instrument is badly written. The IET did not seem to be able to stop that, even though it seems they were part of the consultation. If the tenant prevents the landlord from observing a legal duty, it's probably not in our gift to judge whether the landlord will be convicted in the end (or rather, first be served enforcement, appeal, be fined...) I rather hope that a case like this gets to court as it should provide a proper legal precedent regards how the instrument is interpreted. Someone will suffer for another parties poor choice of datum!
davezawadi (David Stone):
There is a problem here. If the tenant does not want any work carried out (QUITE REASONABLY) then the landlord or contractor has no right to do so. Entry to the tenants home is restricted to a very limited range of actions, and moving the contents about is not one of them, or causing disruption to the tenants' legitimate activities (such as working from home) either. The decorations and room finish form part of the rental contract, so trunking may not be fitted without permission of the tenant, who objects. The law is badly drafted and does not explain how this requirement can be met with sitting tenants. The options offered above would be fantastically expensive (thousands of pounds) so are not practical. No court would convict this Landlord John, and a council would not issue an enforcement notice because they would have to deal with the tenant and their property, and they plead poverty. The LAW is simply BAD. The earth wire provides no additional safety in this installation, so its lack cannot be considered potentially dangerous. It must get a C3, at least until the tenant changes.
The legal instrument is badly written. The IET did not seem to be able to stop that, even though it seems they were part of the consultation. If the tenant prevents the landlord from observing a legal duty, it's probably not in our gift to judge whether the landlord will be convicted in the end (or rather, first be served enforcement, appeal, be fined...) I rather hope that a case like this gets to court as it should provide a proper legal precedent regards how the instrument is interpreted. Someone will suffer for another parties poor choice of datum!
We're about to take you to the IET registration website. Don't worry though, you'll be sent straight back to the community after completing the registration.
Continue to the IET registration site