Failed EICR

Anyone in the contracting sector knows that is how the “schemes” actually work because that is how they make their money. It is very difficult for a “conscientious” contractor to bid against one for a project when the labour costs are so different.

What exactly is the difference between a “Domestic Installer” and an “Approved Contractor” except the amount of money handed over? Is the 2382 pass mark different for the QS? Are the QS responsibilities different? In reality, the Domestic Installer pays less money, and usually, it is better for him/her if they just carry out domestic work. What does BS 7671 say about the competence of each, I cannot find anything?

Now to Inspection. I don't think that anyone has yet said much about the data kindly provided by a number of members of the forum. We can discuss the semantics of coding forever, but that is not the point. Assume that I am the QS of a large contractor. I have a number of staff available, some well-experienced persons, some first-year apprentices. I need all of these to be bringing in revenue, and this requires me to send someone to carry out a wide range of jobs. I have only one fully qualified and experienced inspector. Does it really matter to me who I send to carry out the list of EICRs requested? Do I mind if the results are over-coded, or the forms are wrongly filled in or the customer is charged for unnecessary reparations? Realistically these are either gains for me, or don't matter in the larger scheme of things. Is anyone likely to find the problems, or are they likely to result in damage to my company? Probably not. Does my certifying body care? I have no evidence that it does because there is NO delisting of scheme members. For the scheme, the publicity of delisting should be important, because it shows that standards are being set. However, it loses revenue so is undesirable, and it is easy to ignore complaints from the public who have no idea how to complain effectively. The QS job is done, with no standards, no compliance, no fairness, and loads of cash.

I have a suspicion that the yearly assessment visits are fairly unimportant too. I have a copy of BS 7671 on the shelf. I have my 2382 certificate and my 2391 certificate for inspection. I have one or two “good” EICRs that I can have inspected. If I am asked a few tricky questions I can look in BS 7671 using the index to find the answer, because everything is now open book and I can read. I this really sufficient, or is it a “box-ticking” job? I have never had such a visit, but I have a lot of information from those who have, but I will bet none of you would like one from me, not because I am out to catch you but because I can see through the system to your actual work quality! Standards matter.

Anyone in the contracting sector knows that is how the “schemes” actually work because that is how they make their money. It is very difficult for a “conscientious” contractor to bid against one for a project when the labour costs are so different.

What exactly is the difference between a “Domestic Installer” and an “Approved Contractor” except the amount of money handed over? Is the 2382 pass mark different for the QS? Are the QS responsibilities different? In reality, the Domestic Installer pays less money, and usually, it is better for him/her if they just carry out domestic work. What does BS 7671 say about the competence of each, I cannot find anything?

Now to Inspection. I don't think that anyone has yet said much about the data kindly provided by a number of members of the forum. We can discuss the semantics of coding forever, but that is not the point. Assume that I am the QS of a large contractor. I have a number of staff available, some well-experienced persons, some first-year apprentices. I need all of these to be bringing in revenue, and this requires me to send someone to carry out a wide range of jobs. I have only one fully qualified and experienced inspector. Does it really matter to me who I send to carry out the list of EICRs requested? Do I mind if the results are over-coded, or the forms are wrongly filled in or the customer is charged for unnecessary reparations? Realistically these are either gains for me, or don't matter in the larger scheme of things. Is anyone likely to find the problems, or are they likely to result in damage to my company? Probably not. Does my certifying body care? I have no evidence that it does because there is NO delisting of scheme members. For the scheme, the publicity of delisting should be important, because it shows that standards are being set. However, it loses revenue so is undesirable, and it is easy to ignore complaints from the public who have no idea how to complain effectively. The QS job is done, with no standards, no compliance, no fairness, and loads of cash.

I have a suspicion that the yearly assessment visits are fairly unimportant too. I have a copy of BS 7671 on the shelf. I have my 2382 certificate and my 2391 certificate for inspection. I have one or two “good” EICRs that I can have inspected. If I am asked a few tricky questions I can look in BS 7671 using the index to find the answer, because everything is now open book and I can read. I this really sufficient, or is it a “box-ticking” job? I have never had such a visit, but I have a lot of information from those who have, but I will bet none of you would like one from me, not because I am out to catch you but because I can see through the system to your actual work quality! Standards matter.