What can we do? What can we do as individuals?


First, ensure that our own work is competent. That shouldn't be a problem.


Second, continue to respond to issues which have been raised here.


Third, and this is what David has been doing, collect evidence.


The difficult thing is changing the system. The only thing which comes to mind is to write to my MP (again).

Before launching the landlords safety inspections the government should have considered what the outcome should be.


The government should have produced a compliance guide with legally enforceable minimum standards for installations, there should be a registration scheme for inspectors with a specific qualification requirement and a completely new standard report form.


But nobody wanted that, landlords and others sell argued against setting those requirements.


Landlords EICRs should be done by the book, such as NAPIT Codebreakers with a little leeway on coding that inspectors would have to justify.


Last year I graded a flat as “satisfactory” before doing so I sought guidance, my advisor said he knew I wanted to grade it as unsatisfactory, but I could not justify doing so. It is a forty year old installation with an electric shower, there is not any RCD protection at all for anything, my advisor said that although it felt completely wrong and immoral to say it is still satisfactory, as it has not been altered in forty years I could only write a long list of non-compliances with the current regulations and code all of them C3.


However if there is an incident in that flat the landlord has been told the installation would be a lot safer with RCD protection for all circuits, so it’s not actually my problem.


People also need to realise that if I do an EICR and say the installation is unsatisfactory it’s not actually my problem and just because I have told them there’s problems I am not under any obligation to do the remedial work.

I wrote to my Member of Parliament and raised concerns before the landlords EICR legislation was passed into law, I was told it would all be okay.


If everything goes pear shaped I can at least say I told you so. My wife thinks I will be better off keeping out of it all as it’s not worth the time and hassle involved.


The government now needs to extend the same time allowed for landlords to comply by at least two years as they completely underestimated the work required without the delays caused by Covid.

As I said it felt wrong and immoral to class that installation as satisfactory, but after deep discussion that’s how it was graded.


I could only find red and black cables through out the installation, the shower had been replaced but the circuit is original and is not an addition.


If one of my my children were buying that flat I would be in there replacing the consumer units as soon as they had the keys, and I would be advising them against renting it as tenants.

Of course people ask for EICRs for various reasons. Like if you're about to buy a house, you want to know things such as: is it dangerous right now? Even if it's not dangerous, should I consider a complete rewire before moving in; or at least a CU change; or maybe some things should be fixed up initially? Then, how much life has the installation left? Might it be worth rewiring each room individually when it's that room's turn to be renovated or redecorated?


On the other hand, the statutory consideration for a landlord is (or at least should be): is this dwelling likely to be safe for the next 5 years or so, especially given that it will likely be occupied by a variety of tenants, some of whom will have a casual relationship with safe practices.


Personally I think something akin to at least a subset of the Napit codebreakers should become part of BS7671 (or maybe another standard) that defines how much backwards compatibility should be tolerated in a well-maintained establishment - for one example that all electrical equipment within the zones of a bathroom should be RCD protected. The landlord regs would then make a particular edition of this standard mandatory for rented accommodation. As BS7671 updates over the years, so does this other standard. So the latest edition in 15 years time might mandate all the RCD protection currently mandated by BS7671:2018

geoffsd:


It is obviously not good enough.


However, the blame is solely with the government.

They introduce unnecessary new laws merely for effect while using words and terms of which no one knows the meaning - electrical safety report; qualified person - while ignoring the fact that absolutely anyone can purport to be competent and carry out electrical work in England. 


The usual practice of most laws relating to such things will be employed; namely nothing will be done to police any work or results until someone is killed when blame can be apportioned to anyone other than a negligent government.

 

I'm not so sure that the government is soley to blame here. Its more likely to be lobbyist' such as NICEIC, NAPIT, LFB who are vying for top dog.in the badger pit providing implied ambiguity and badger sized holes in their  thinking

All the government has done is produced a white paper to legislate against dodgy electrical work and a clean up method called EICR for properties run as businesses.  How it operates is open for debate. Its important not to think too deeply when deeling with tick boxes.

Legh

Rather than dealing with the "endless problems brought to the forum " maybe someone should raise concerns about the huge number of properties that have a "satisfactory electrical safety certificate" that are not really fit for purpose in the 21st century or just clearly unsafe. 


The system that has been put into place allows any Tom, Dick or Harriet to issue an EICR without any checks or safe guards.

I think that the controllimg bodies are much to blame for the standards of EICR's; instead of a contractor being able to offer 2 jobs for assessment, all their work jobs should be made eligible for assessment; the controlling body should then be responsible for arranging the visits for the assessment ..... directly with the customers; this arrangement would obviously have be made in unison, otherwise it would lead to froghopping between schemes. More work for the clerical administration of the controlling bodies, but a much more effective means of a contractor's assessment and should also lead to an improvement in the contractor's self discipline for all work..Further, why are the rates in MyBuilder.com so low for EICR's? . 

  

Those of us conscientious types at the coal face, see the examples of unprofessionalism. When I discussed the problems with my assessor of the bad performance by builder's "electricians" and those carrying out EICR's, there wasn't the reaction I would have expected. As an example, I was requested to give an EICR on a property after a builder had built a new outbuilding for living accommodation, (to comply with Part P), this involved a new 8 way CU located in the kitchen of the original house to the new outbuilding. The incoming supply to the house was a TT supply with a VOELCB and an earth rod which obviously hadn't been recently tested, the original CU had a plastic body and was under the stairs with other add ons. I walked away ...... no doubt Another wuld have coined it..


I think also that Builders should be made much more responsible for work to Part P.  


Jaymack

You’re having a laugh, in the last few yearsI have done jobs in Launceston, Lowestoft, Woolacombe, Preston, Merton, Exeter, Llandudno, Milford Haven, Gateshead, Ilford and a few hundred places in between.


Finding a job for assessment is a challenge that takes quite some sorting out, because in amongst the finding one local, a lot of customers don’t actually want someone wandering around their home quizzing an electrician who did some work for them.


Indeed I have customers who did not want to let the LABC Building Inspector into their home, never mind an electrical scheme assessor.