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 46 replies
  • Subscribers 31 subscribers
  • Views 6013 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

£30k fine for landlords who do not provide a valid EICR for their rental properties

Legh Richardson
Is this actually true or is it some estate agent cashing in on lost income?

The reason why I ask, what appears to be a daft question, is that a friend has just received notification from the estate agent who sold the property 15 years ago that their property, which is now being rented, must be inspected and tested for compliance to 18th ed. Not that I was unaware of this requirement!

I just thought the £30k punishment for disobedience was a little steep. Or maybe  'bribery and corruption' or  'threatening behaviour' was the new Inspection and testing idiom.?

Legh
  • 0
    Oh dear! I think that we have discussed this before.


    R.11 of The Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020


    Financial penalties for breach of duties

    11.—(1) Where a local housing authority is satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that a private landlord has breached a duty under regulation 3, the authority may impose a financial penalty (or more than one penalty in the event of a continuing failure) in respect of the breach.



    (2) A financial penalty—



    (a)may be of such amount as the authority imposing it determines; but



    (b)must not exceed £30,000.


    So £30k is the max. Appeal is to the Property Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal.


    I have also discussed this with a judge of the Chamber and they are not expecting a flood-gate of appeals. If this really was going to be a problem, I am certain that the Chamber would be preparing for it.
  • 0
    One imagines the full wack fine would only be levied in cases of blatant and repeated disregard for the rules.

    Like all things local authority related it is more likely to start with a strongly worded letter asking you to do something within 14 days or suffer another letter.

    Someone making reasonable efforts to comply but taking a little extra time to get things tested or repaired or whatever  will not be subject to this.

    This is much the same in all levels of the law actually - the maximum penalty is rarely handed down, as it is just that a maximum.

    Mike.


  • 0
    An article by Charlotte Lee.


  • 0
    That link talks of guidance to LAs, I suspect

    The guidance that LAs are probably following is this


     Note the bit at the end of section 3.
    "A landlord is NOT  in breach of the duty to comply with a remedial notice if the landlord can show they have taken all reasonable steps to comply. "


    So even after the first warning letter,  the owner or whoever is not liable for prosecution, if they can explain why it is taking longer than expected to get up to scratch. I particularly like the  part .

    landlord who has been prevented from accessing the premises will not be required to begin legal proceedings against their tenant

    tells a story..

    M.

  • 0
    The link came through as an email and trimmed the end of it ? anyway I redid it as it didn’t work when I clicked it after posting.
  • 0
    mapj1:

    landlord who has been prevented from accessing the premises will not be required to begin legal proceedings against their tenant

    tells a story..

    M.

     




    Possibly the same tenant who has taken a “rent holiday”.


  • 0
    Sparkingchip:
    An article by Charlotte Lee.


     


    She says:


    "An Unsatisfactory EICR is one which has Observation Codes C1, C2 and/or Further Investigation (FI), which indicate an electrical danger is present, or further work is needed to ascertain whether a danger is present."


    Z.


  • 0
    Zoomup:
    Sparkingchip:
    An article by Charlotte Lee.


     


    She says:


    "An Unsatisfactory EICR is one which has Observation Codes C1, C2 and/or Further Investigation (FI), which indicate an electrical danger is present, or further work is needed to ascertain whether a danger is present."


    Z.







    So?


  • 0
    mapj1:

    So even after the first warning letter,  the owner or whoever is not liable for prosecution ...


    I think that it is important to realise that it is not a criminal matter, so no prosecution.


    Instead R.11 permits a local authority to impose a financial penalty of up to £30k for breach of duties. The standard of proof is the same as for criminal cases - beyond reasonable doubt. (see above)


    If that happens, you may appeal to the First-tier Tribunal.


  • 0
    Sparkingchip:
    Zoomup:
    Sparkingchip:
    An article by Charlotte Lee.


     


    She says:


    "An Unsatisfactory EICR is one which has Observation Codes C1, C2 and/or Further Investigation (FI), which indicate an electrical danger is present, or further work is needed to ascertain whether a danger is present."


    Z.







    So?




    Does F.I. really mean that an electrical danger is present?


    Z.


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