EICR - Somebody is setting the bar low.....

[chrisclose]

My favourite was number of poles =25

Personal favourite also, I find myself reading through it again and again and I don't know why!!

 

[NDG Elecs]

Personal favourite also, I find myself reading through it again and again and I don't know why!!

Didn't spot the 25 poles. Brilliant!

Cct 8 appears likely to be a lighting cct due to cable size. But then it's had r1rN done on it. Why......because of open CPC on same cct....who knows!

I am going to print this when I get a chance and have a proper chuckle.

 

[7029 dave]

Originally Posted by Dcf My favourite was number of poles =25
Personal favourite also, I find myself reading through it again and again and I don't know why!!


Don't you know that's the number of poles living in the house.:icon12:

 

[GB.Kayak]

Originally Posted by Dcf My favourite was number of poles =25
Personal favourite also, I find myself reading through it again and again and I don't know why!!


Don't you know that's the number of poles living in the house.:icon12:

... oh no it's not ... it's the number of electricity poles visible from the upstairs bedroom where the consumer unit is located!

 

[7029 dave]

... oh no it's not ... it's the number of electricity poles visible from the upstairs bedroom where the consumer unit is located!

Like it.

 

[chrisclose]

Printed this off and had a better look at it... now granted there are large sections of the report not filled out, however, having looked at it I think this may not be as bad as I first thought it was.. it almost looks like someone's computer software they've used for this has made a mess because a lot of the readings etc are correct but just in the wrong place as if he's filled in the blank but the computer has it in a different section when printing.

There's no getting away from the fact that some of the terminology used is incredible and surely this person should have reviewed what they've just printed off before handing it over... but it is a possibility.

 

[DPG]

I think you're right about the computer software - it looks like some of the entries have gone out of step with the columns. But surely they would have noticed it at some point! Does also seem strange with the '12325' number, although that could well be the default entry which is pre-populated as a place-holder? Daz

 

[chrisclose]

Had a quick look on the interweb there typed in "eicr certificate" and clicked the first link and up came the very cert in this pdf.. downloaded it and the 'report number' on it? 12345... my impression is that someone who isn't very computer savy done this report.

 

[Lazlo]

They still issued it and charged the client £250. Nothing wrong with a hand written report if they didn't know how to work 'a computer'......

I don't think they have ever done an EICR before and tried to bungle through it. Wouldn't you need professional indemnity insurance to cover yourself should a legal issue arise from something untoward found in a report you had written and issued?

 

[chrisclose]

I wasn't disagreeing with that... in fact I agree 100% that it's a terrible attempt and someone should be ashamed to have issued this and charged someone for it.. I was simply trying to offer an opinion on what I'd found by printing the document in question out and having a good read through it.

We don't know the situation.. This person could have handed in a written report to their employer, been told come back with an electronic copy and been to proud to say they didn't understand how the software at their disposal worked

Anyway, like we both, along with everyone else agrees with... its a shocker and shouldn't have been issued

 

[123]

Yes, the middle man company charged a clean fortune for the EICR. They probably sourced the cheapest price they could find, which is reflected in the quality of the report.