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

Is a QS entitled to sign off an EICR?

Open to debate, but I say no.


The whole concept of QS seems to be a creation of NICEIC, but I can see the point of it. If I am employed by DZ Electrical and make a mess of things, the company is vicariously responsible for my errors. I cannot be sued. So it would be in the interests of DZ Electrical to ensure that I am competent to work for them.


However, I suggest that an EICR is personal. The model form in Appendix 6 (page 473) has a declaration, but includes the name and signature of the inspector and tester as well as whoever authorises the report.

651.5 The periodic inspection and testing shall be carried out by one or more skilled persons competent in such work. Skilled person is defined in Part 2. If the identity of the inspector and tester is not disclosed, how may I as the client know that he or she is skilled?


The Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020 require that A private landlord ... must ... ensure that every electrical installation in the residential premises is inspected and tested at regular intervals by a qualified person and qualified person is defined as a person competent to undertake the inspection and testing required under regulation 3(1) and any further investigative or remedial work in accordance with the electrical safety standards.


If the identity of the inspector and tester is not revealed, how could the landlord possibly ensure that he (or she) is qualified?


So, in my opinion, at the very least for a private landlord's report, the EICR must be signed off by the inspector and tester. I might go further and suggest that the report should include the inspector's qualifications.
Parents
  • Geof


    Part P has nothing directly to do with the Landlords' certificates of the quality of the installation and compliance with the latest edition of BS7671, it is true. However, I was trying to describe how we got to this place, and the ineffectiveness of previous, possibly similar, ideas on regulations other than BS7671. The question of competence is clearly central to all these ideas, yet PartP has been singularly ineffective in improving competence, in fact, it has probably had the opposite effect. I am merely making the point that we do not want to go that way again.
Reply
  • Geof


    Part P has nothing directly to do with the Landlords' certificates of the quality of the installation and compliance with the latest edition of BS7671, it is true. However, I was trying to describe how we got to this place, and the ineffectiveness of previous, possibly similar, ideas on regulations other than BS7671. The question of competence is clearly central to all these ideas, yet PartP has been singularly ineffective in improving competence, in fact, it has probably had the opposite effect. I am merely making the point that we do not want to go that way again.
Children
No Data