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 13 replies
  • Subscribers 27 subscribers
  • Views 1072 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

EICR waddaya fink?

ebee
I have an EICR which was done for a client prior a house sale.

NICEIC approved contractor.

Part 3 summary states "satisfactory apart from items listed"


Overall assessment SATISFACTORY.


3 items listed in part 6 al of them awarded a C2.


This was given to me buy the buyer who needed it for his solicitor on purchase a few months back.


I have yet to read thru the report yet.


I`d need to ask the buyer`s permission before I offer a copy to Dave Z in his crusade and I might have to redact some details as well.


Initial comments?
Parents
  • 0
    Am not excusing bad work but it would help immensely if the IET left the nomenclature and coding system alone, not only on EICRs (what was wrong with the simple term 'PIR' for goodness sake?)

    Same with 'basic protection' and 'fault protection' - why could they not leave it as be? People just about get their heads around what is meant by the definitions - exposed and extraneous conductive parts, and they change it again. No wonder folk get confused as to what is actually intended. Leave the regulations alone for at least 10 years and let people get used to them, rather than constantly change and reword the basics. Less room - and excuses for errors then.
Reply
  • 0
    Am not excusing bad work but it would help immensely if the IET left the nomenclature and coding system alone, not only on EICRs (what was wrong with the simple term 'PIR' for goodness sake?)

    Same with 'basic protection' and 'fault protection' - why could they not leave it as be? People just about get their heads around what is meant by the definitions - exposed and extraneous conductive parts, and they change it again. No wonder folk get confused as to what is actually intended. Leave the regulations alone for at least 10 years and let people get used to them, rather than constantly change and reword the basics. Less room - and excuses for errors then.
Children
No Data

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