This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

EICR Remedial Work

Former Community Member
Former Community Member
Hi, my first post, I wondered if I could get some advice from the community regarding a failed EICR report and the subsequent remedial works.

Me letting agent appointed a local electrical firm to conduct an EICR report on my flat before new tenants moved in. The timescale was tight since the new tenants were due to move in on the 1st Feb.


The flat is a purpose-built flat constructed in 2005 so id be surprised if the electrics were too far out of spec.


The report came back as failed due to the following points:


1 No Bonding, substantial metal pipework in property

8 Fan is not low voltage in bathroom, and is in zone 2


the quotation for the remedial work was to install 100mm bonding from the consumer unit to the stop cock and replace the extractor with an extra low voltage fan and controller.

"estimate of a morning for 2 which hopefully will be less, however the route is not particularly easy" - £630 inc VAT.


the quote sounded high for a mornings work but due to time constraints i had to agree.


the final invoice came back as 28 hours work, £1399...  so that's 28 hours work to run about 6metres of earth bonding and replace the bathroom fan when the initial quote was a morning's work for £630.


So obviously I've questioned this and after doing some digging, I found that firstly 230v fans are allowed in zone 2, and not all incoming water pipes need to be bonded if there is plastic in the incoming supply..


I'll upload screenshots of the paper work and photos of the job, but any advice would be greatly appreciated!

fef58217ef06411ab3fcb5e012db7a01-huge-quotation.png



b2dc16ff7b1f285e61c95ea8dd664268-huge-eicr-report.png


Parents
  • Humm - that supply looks suspiciously like it might be CNE to the head (alternatively it might be split-con with L & N in one leg of the trouser and PE in the other, but I'm not convinced). CNE within a building isn't what the DNOs like to do these days (especially as they usually pass the buck to a fictional BNO) but was common enough a few years ago. The original design might then  have considered the block to consist of mutiple distinct installations with separate DNO supplies for each flat - and hence would have required main bonding (if necessary) within each flat (like a terrace of houses). If the water pipe is in contact with class I equipment in another installation (e.g. the pump - presumably on the landlord's supply) then it would be classed as an extraneous-conductive-part as far as the flat was concerned (even if the water originally came out of the ground in plastic). Just a thought...

       - Andy.
Reply
  • Humm - that supply looks suspiciously like it might be CNE to the head (alternatively it might be split-con with L & N in one leg of the trouser and PE in the other, but I'm not convinced). CNE within a building isn't what the DNOs like to do these days (especially as they usually pass the buck to a fictional BNO) but was common enough a few years ago. The original design might then  have considered the block to consist of mutiple distinct installations with separate DNO supplies for each flat - and hence would have required main bonding (if necessary) within each flat (like a terrace of houses). If the water pipe is in contact with class I equipment in another installation (e.g. the pump - presumably on the landlord's supply) then it would be classed as an extraneous-conductive-part as far as the flat was concerned (even if the water originally came out of the ground in plastic). Just a thought...

       - Andy.
Children
No Data