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

The FI problem is a bit of a figment of a report. I think that a report should fully explain the inspectors investigation. In the unidentified cable finding above, the report should say what was done to identify the circuit, where its extent could be established, and why the inspector stopped inspecting. In a domestic this problem comes down to the method used to inspect. Take a kitchen / utility room installation fed with 4 circuits, the inspector should make no assumptions. The method is to isolate all circuits, power up a single one and test every point for power (which is pretty quick, use a plug indicator, appliance power lights, etc). A quick sketch of where power is found is useful. The second circuit is then checked in the same way, more sockets and perhaps a fixed appliance, and so on until all the supplies are identified. This takes very little time in most installations and enables the LABELLING to be checked (which I think is important, and often incorrect). When this is done throughout the property it is likely that all points will be found with power, any obvious faults identified, and any unused circuits found. One will also have made a complete record of the installation, which looks good attached to the EICR, and is useful in the future. This takes perhaps 30 minutes, and has done most of the inspections needed, cracked accessories, installation defects, faulty switches etc. A circuit with a breaker and goes nowhere is probably to the shed, garage, greenhouse, aerial amplifier in roof or similar, although odd unused "ends" could be present. Next measure the circuits, R2, IR, rings etc, and you know there is nothing plugged in because you have already seen all the associated points. Now live tests, EFLI, RCDs etc, and you are nearly done, having reconnected everything and therefore checked all the CU screws. Time to trace anything odd, the garden list, any circuit which is hidden in a sea of insulation in the loft, and here is the question. How many would attempt a full inspection of the insulated loft?


Now what is left? Is there something unidentified, which you have made reasonable attempts to find? If so note what you did, where you looked etc. and then a FI. Anything else is very poor, the next guy has to do it all again! I would not disconnect anything which did not have an identified end, this is not part of an inspection, it is remedials with corresponding risks. The report is a report, not a safety ensuring exercise for unknown risks. It could be a supply to a neighbour with a ventilator off a different phase as backup, and this could have severe consequences (yes I have seen that).


The EICR is an important report. It needs to be done in a fully competent way. That means using all the skills to hand to fully understand an installation, and to document the result. The rush to the bottom is not a desired outcome.


I would like many more poor EICRs please, the ones I have show disasterously low standards, but a few good ones would also be nice!

The FI problem is a bit of a figment of a report. I think that a report should fully explain the inspectors investigation. In the unidentified cable finding above, the report should say what was done to identify the circuit, where its extent could be established, and why the inspector stopped inspecting. In a domestic this problem comes down to the method used to inspect. Take a kitchen / utility room installation fed with 4 circuits, the inspector should make no assumptions. The method is to isolate all circuits, power up a single one and test every point for power (which is pretty quick, use a plug indicator, appliance power lights, etc). A quick sketch of where power is found is useful. The second circuit is then checked in the same way, more sockets and perhaps a fixed appliance, and so on until all the supplies are identified. This takes very little time in most installations and enables the LABELLING to be checked (which I think is important, and often incorrect). When this is done throughout the property it is likely that all points will be found with power, any obvious faults identified, and any unused circuits found. One will also have made a complete record of the installation, which looks good attached to the EICR, and is useful in the future. This takes perhaps 30 minutes, and has done most of the inspections needed, cracked accessories, installation defects, faulty switches etc. A circuit with a breaker and goes nowhere is probably to the shed, garage, greenhouse, aerial amplifier in roof or similar, although odd unused "ends" could be present. Next measure the circuits, R2, IR, rings etc, and you know there is nothing plugged in because you have already seen all the associated points. Now live tests, EFLI, RCDs etc, and you are nearly done, having reconnected everything and therefore checked all the CU screws. Time to trace anything odd, the garden list, any circuit which is hidden in a sea of insulation in the loft, and here is the question. How many would attempt a full inspection of the insulated loft?


Now what is left? Is there something unidentified, which you have made reasonable attempts to find? If so note what you did, where you looked etc. and then a FI. Anything else is very poor, the next guy has to do it all again! I would not disconnect anything which did not have an identified end, this is not part of an inspection, it is remedials with corresponding risks. The report is a report, not a safety ensuring exercise for unknown risks. It could be a supply to a neighbour with a ventilator off a different phase as backup, and this could have severe consequences (yes I have seen that).


The EICR is an important report. It needs to be done in a fully competent way. That means using all the skills to hand to fully understand an installation, and to document the result. The rush to the bottom is not a desired outcome.


I would like many more poor EICRs please, the ones I have show disasterously low standards, but a few good ones would also be nice!