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

What do you consider a sample to mean during an EICR

I’m interested to hear peoples opinions on how they approach an EICR with regards to a sample? I’m asking because I was recently reviewing a couple of domestic EICRs for a client and raised a couple of questions one being that test results were only recorded for two of the six circuits. The response was that they were employed only to carry out a 20% sample. Personally I’ve always considered a 20% sample to mean that all circuits should be tested but only at 20% of the accessories connected to them will be fully tested and inspected. I’ve also always thought when carrying out an EICR for the purposes of private lettings that this practice is only an option when the previous records are available, and if you do choose to carry out a small sample you’d be likely to widen the search if you found any C2’s or C1s. What is everyone’s thoughts here, how does the community approach EICRs?

I was just surprised to see an unsatisfactory report where the sample hadn’t been widened and where four circuits had no test results recorded, not even Insulation resistance, it’s so quick getting IR results on a single phase board.

Parents
  • If you are experienced enough to know what to look for, and know what is and what is not a compliance, then an initial visual via a walk around should be good enough to tell you whether or not an in depth PIR is worth carrying out to completion. When I used to do them I would advise the client upon finding the first couple of obvious non compliances that it wasn't worth getting the test kit out to compile measurements for a report because from what I had initially seen, the installation would fail at once. and that they were wasting their money by keeping me there for another 7 hours or however long it would take to test. And no, I no longer do PIRs as they were formerly (and more accurately known) because I could no longer compete with surveys conducted exclusively from the van window. Nor, at the age of 61, am I after any physically onorous remedial works.

    I am past the 'Rewire the whole place' mode and I cannot afford an apprentice!

    It isn't always so obvious, but anyone who is engaged in such activities should know when to call it a day even before the 1st coffee of the day goes cold. If it is that bad, then anything else is just taking the proverbial out of the customer.

Reply
  • If you are experienced enough to know what to look for, and know what is and what is not a compliance, then an initial visual via a walk around should be good enough to tell you whether or not an in depth PIR is worth carrying out to completion. When I used to do them I would advise the client upon finding the first couple of obvious non compliances that it wasn't worth getting the test kit out to compile measurements for a report because from what I had initially seen, the installation would fail at once. and that they were wasting their money by keeping me there for another 7 hours or however long it would take to test. And no, I no longer do PIRs as they were formerly (and more accurately known) because I could no longer compete with surveys conducted exclusively from the van window. Nor, at the age of 61, am I after any physically onorous remedial works.

    I am past the 'Rewire the whole place' mode and I cannot afford an apprentice!

    It isn't always so obvious, but anyone who is engaged in such activities should know when to call it a day even before the 1st coffee of the day goes cold. If it is that bad, then anything else is just taking the proverbial out of the customer.

Children
  • But, but, but a complete thorough inspection and test of a house wiring enables an accurate estimate as to the cost of remedial work. How else do we know just what has to be done?

    Z.

  • Well you are primarily there to perform a PIR not to assess the amount of extra work you might be able to gleen.

    There must be a level of impartiality with this work so that the client will believe in your professional integrity.

  • Zoom, if you are experienced enough you will come to know the signs of a dead installation well past it's useful life by a visual inspection only. Check behind a couple of switches and sockets. Look at the styles of accessories - are they of 1960s vintage? Remove the front off the consumer unit or fusebox - whichever is fitted. Are the cables VIR? PVC with, or without a cpc? There really isn't much point in getting the meters out if the visual suggests otherwise.

  • O.K. so the installation is not fit for continued safe use. What will the customer then ask you?

    Z.

  • With a car M.O.T. inspection, does the inspector stop if you have a bald tyre, or continue to create a full and detailed helpful report?

    An E.I.C.R. has to be detailed and comprehensive, otherwise we cannot fill in all of the boxes.

    Please see blue book page 475, para 1. We are required to record damage, deterioration, dangerous conditions and non compliances which may give rise to danger.

    Z.

  • The customer may or may not hire you for remedial work.

    First of all, it would be wise to make sure that you have established the ground rules of the contract.

    IMO, I&T and remedial installation work would be better kept completely separate organised and delivered by different companies.

  • O.K. so the installation is not fit for continued safe use. What will the customer then ask you?

    I think that it's getting a bit off topic, but I'm with Zoomy. Of course it's all for discussion with the customer, but you might say that a complete rewire seems to be required and charge less for the brief EICR (in the hope that you get the contract). Or the customer might want confirmation that nothing can be saved.

    I have reservations about the analogy with the MOT, but I'd not be particularly impressed if I was advised to scrap my car. On the other hand, if it failed on a tyre, I replaced it and went back; I'd not be impressed if something else failed.