Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 57 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 4486 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

17th edition design given 18th edition certifcate

Former Community Member
Former Community Member
Hello, I recently purchased a new build home on a small development; a rather unique situation has occurred that I thought was interesting and might interest some people here to discuss. It's still currently unresolved but progress is being made.


The house has a NICEIC BS 7671: 2018 domestic electrical installation certificate dated 5/2/20 with no departures identified; with the only comment being no water bond due to plastic pipework. I noticed that no SPD had been fitted so asked the contractor for the completed risk assessment to determine that it was not needed. Initially they did not know what I was on about and then said that no SPD was fitted due to the initial design being done in December 2018 to the 17th edition. So far so good!


However on the electrical designs I have there was a revision on 27/5/2019 and at my request I later paid for an additional £1700 of fixed LED lighting to be installed throughout on 20/11/2019. After bringing this up I was told it was still to the 17th and that "any subsequent revisions are based on the regulations in force at the time of the original design". The installation certificate includes these lighting changes as many more (20+) positions are served on the circuits, everything else seems to be as the 27/5/2019 revision design.


I then asked why a 18th edition certificate had been issued with no note of that the installation is actually to 17th design and standard and was told that they had used up all their 17th edition certificates during the grace period, that the NICEIC had advised them to use 18th edition certificates but place "n/a" on items pertaining to SPDs and that their response is to amend the existing certificate to note that the installation was carried out to the 17th edition regulations.


I can forgive that yes, even a brand new home can be delivered not to the latest regulation due to a design from a grace period (as always regulations can be updated quicker than projects) but I do not get a good feeling from the 18th edition certificate being issued on a 17th edition design and installation without any indication - certainly the other homeowners on the development may not be as keen on protecting their extra gizmos as I am!



 


  • 0
    This is an interesting question.


    If the installation has been certified to 18th Edn, that is the edition which must apply.


    It is permissible to certify to the edition which was in force when the installation was designed. There is absolutely nothing to prevent the installer certifying to 17th Edn using pen and paper!


    I suspect that the real issue here is contract. What was agreed?
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Yes I am finding it interesting also.


    I am just the homeowner, the contract will have been with the builder and then developer - so I am unsure of the details.


    As far as I can see, there was no notification that it was to the 17th, other than the SPD elements on the 18th edition certificate being marked N/A rather than ticked.


    I would think that the 18th certificate has already been passed to the warranty provider. So getting it altered now might prove a right faff!


    ​​​​​




  • 0
    I think the NICEIC have advised them wrongly. They should not have used 18th edition forms for a 17th Edition install. If the firm had ran out of NICEIC branded 17th Ed  forms, they could have used model 17th Ed forms as Chris said. The alteration works ordered by you in 2019 should have been installed to the 18th edition in my opinion, and minor works certs issued accordingly, as they are a separate contract and not part of the 2019 "revision" by the contractors.

  • 0
    I agree with OlympusMons. That was certainly a bit of daft advice from NICEIC whichI can’t imagine would be officially countenanced by them. More likely someone non-technical in their sales department. Whilst I can sympathise with the situation from the contractor’s perspective, you are right to take a stand and see this through. If nothing else, it will mean at least one more contractor will be reminded to be more diligent with his documentation.
  • 0
    If the SPD is required because the additional work of installing extra lighting was ordered by the purchaser of the house, then the cost of installing the SPD should have been added onto the £1700 being paid for the additional lighting.


    If no one else on the site paid for additional electrical work then their installation would almost certainly have been designed to the 17th edition, so there’s no real reason why it should be considered that any of the other houses should have had a SPD installed.
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    The latest suggestion is that they will reissue a 17th edition certificate and be done with it.


    I'm not sure how you would go about this since the 18th certificate was probably sent to insurance bods etc? I will seek guidance from the NICEIC.


    I have some downlights that they missed out from the install but paid for originally, so that will be an interesting minor works certificate.
  • 0
    This is why a lot of the new house builders used to refuse to make any alterations or additions to the plans and specifications of the houses they built, enforcing a strict policy of if you want something changed do it yourself after you have bought and paid for it.
  • 0
    I think you have a different story here, and you have an NICEIC contractor. I wonder just how accurate your EIC measurements are? It sounds to me as though you have an "office" certificate there. I would expect you to have and EIC for the original install, and a minor works certificate for the changes that were made afterward. That would mean that SPDs etc were not required whatever the supposed risk, that no assessment for AFDDs is needed etc. The fact that you have an 18th edition model form is not a problem, it is that the designer should have put the design date on the form, in his box. I assume you do have a 3 box form, Designer, Installer, and Inspector all signed by 3 persons? Somehow I doubt it. If not I would be very interested to have a copy, not to follow your case but as evidence of what is going on, and a description from you of your understanding, pretty much as above, with your name and address (No comeback on you in any case). My email davezawadi (at) yahoo.co.uk.


    Thanks very much.

    Kind regards


    David CEng etc.
  • 0
    Well I don`t suppose that I will actually surprise any of you good people if I say that I`m aware of just one house actually being inspected and tested and results noted, per every 20 to 30 houses built then the results copied to give one cert per house. No wonder some houses have incomplete rings etc for years after.
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Thanks for the replies! I thought this would spur some discussion.


    If it helps the development is less than 15 homes all above £500,000.


    The certificate is a two signature "design, construction, inspection and testing" and then qualified supervisor type both dated 5/2/20.


    It does have the additional points served on the lighting circuits on it.


    ​​​​​​Yes I can sympathize with the contractor, but I was expecting this to be a simple resolution.

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines