Landlord electrical safety certificate

davezawadi (David Stone):

Alcomax

The only way to give an EICR to a landlord, where it is necessary to be completely compliant with BS7671, is to have no limitations. If you say "I didn't inspect x, y or z because..., the installation may not be compliant, and therefore not meet the law as described. If I say "I did not check this circuit, or I couldn't inspect under the floor although I knew there was a junction box or....." you see it just goes on. Limitations should be few and simple with good reasons. I have seen EICRs where basically nothing useful was inspected or tested because of a string of reasons, even including "I could not inspect the CU because the cupboard was full of junk". So a quick visual of what could be seen and a satisfactory installation. Is that the standard which you think should be met, because if so I know a couple of dodgy landlords who would find you jolly useful!

What company you frequent is your own business.

"The only way to give an EICR to a landlord, where it is necessary to be completely compliant with BS7671, is to have no limitations. "


The above is nonsensical. The nearest scenario could possibly be a Regularisation for BC purposes, even then there would be agreed limitations.


I suggest you have a read of Guidance Note 3.


To be clear, "where it is necessary to be completely compliant with BS7671" is for new works and additions. Read into the new law what you will, but it is written in usual legal jargon expressly  to allow for the application of reasonableness.


The gist is that the Inspector has to know what they are doing and be able to back it up. Anyone doing remedial's afterwards has to do this Installation work fully compliant with BS7671, so an electrical installation certificate and/or minor works certificate for these works.


There seems to be a determination to sow seeds of doubts in the minds of electricians conducting EICR for rental. Would this be due to their being vested interests in making money out of  this fey "confusion"?

Alcomax:

There seems to be a determination to sow seeds of doubts in the minds of electricians conducting EICR for rental. Would this be due to their being vested interests in making money out of  this fey "confusion"?

I have no issues about folk making money out of these new regulations and it would be nice if the inspection activity was as fastidious as some have studied the law associated with them. I try to stay well clear of the domestic sector but I have to dip the toe in on occasions. Last week I did a two up two down terrace house on my own. I charged £160 plus vat. I can tell you that although I took my time and was very measured, I certainly wouldnt have wanted to be going to another one on that day. The landlord moaned a bit because another lad had quoted £120 plus vat but he wasnt available for several weeks. People might be making a few quid but if they are doing it right at those prices, they deserve it!

davezawadi (David Stone):

Alcomax

The only way to give an EICR to a landlord, where it is necessary to be completely compliant with BS7671, is to have no limitations. If you say "I didn't inspect x, y or z because..., the installation may not be compliant, and therefore not meet the law as described. If I say "I did not check this circuit, or I couldn't inspect under the floor although I knew there was a junction box or....." you see it just goes on. Limitations should be few and simple with good reasons. I have seen EICRs where basically nothing useful was inspected or tested because of a string of reasons, even including "I could not inspect the CU because the cupboard was full of junk". So a quick visual of what could be seen and a satisfactory installation. Is that the standard which you think should be met, because if so I know a couple of dodgy landlords who would find you jolly useful!

But provided that the landlord is clutching a report that shows no defects, then nobody has any way to tell that the installation is non-compliant.  If you only have to find a blind electrician every five years, you could go for decades without anybody being any the wiser.  The report just has to look plausible enough to get it past the council.


What it needs is a limitation that's an encoded way to say "I wasn't actually asked to look at the installation; the landlord described it to me over the phone, and it sounds compliant".

geoffsd:

Can the client therefore stipulate any limitation they want?


For example: do not inspect construction material of the consumer unit.

?    Cheeky.


I think it best that the inspector sets those!


They can stipulate their requirements , you stipulate yours. If its something unreasonable as above, then you would be a fool to accept the contract. As this is clearly then a "dodgy landlord", then play them at there own  game, having taken payment in advance, you say the construction of the unit is fundamental in deciding the outcome and so attribute FI [ futher investigation] to the temporarily "invisible" consumer unit.