How not to standard is this rewire?

[JimCee]

Hi,
My son has just (last week) had a rewire done on his house in Leyland. He has just bought the house but a "domino" type consumer unit was spotted and so a rewire was deemed necessary.
He wanted to move in with his girlfriend and 2 month old son as quickly as possible so phoned a website to get electricians to call him with quotes based on the job being done ASAP.
Electrician gave him a quote £3000 and he accepted - work could be done the following week. The day arrived and was completed in the day by "a load of very young people" and the house was in a right state.
They have run 4 spurs in the house which I thought was pretty poor for a rewire and I don't know if this is to regulations.
But the real problem came when I was reboarding the loft. There were a load of chopped wires in the way of the boards so I pulled them back as far as possible and cut them further back. Whilst pulling the wires, the skirting board fell off. Behind the skirting board, there was a hole in the plaster board and an old fashioned connection block (with screws) fell out as did the ends of 2 conductors. One of the 3 wires that came out of this block was in the way of the boards. As conductors had dropped out, obviously an old wire I thought and so started cutting it with my electrical cutters and the upstairs socket ring tripped.
On investigation, the new upstairs socket ring has been cut, the earth conductors cut back - breaking the earth ring, the positive and neutral conductors having been pushed into the connector but not screwed down properly and the cable that I had cut - upon tracing was actually an open live cable - just lying under the loft insulation.
Looking round, the new lighting circuit has been extended - also by means of an old fashioned type connector block with screws in and taped up.
I was furious and phoned the electrician who between my rants told me that it was perfectly reasonable to extend the lighting circuit by means of a taped up connector block with screws to secure the conductors.
The electrician has given my son an electrical certificate (which I haven't seen and probably wouldn't understand) but on reading info on the internet, I cannot understand how he has done a test with the earth conductors on the upstairs ring being cut back at the loose connection block breaking the circuit.
The guy is coming back on Monday to "have a look what is going on" but apart from being outright dangerous with an open ended live cable, are the old fashioned screw type connector blocks acceptable - whether taped or un-taped, are spurs to standard and can I report this guy and if so, who to?
Thanks for any advice,
Jim.

 

[littlespark]

It could be that the 1.0 is on its way to a cheap downlight, with the usual cpc problems that cheap downlights come with.

And on the other hand…. It could be feeding the flipping cooker for all we know!

 

[Baddegg]

It could be that the 1.0 is on its way to a cheap downlight, with the usual cpc problems that cheap downlights come with.

It looks to me like they were planning a socket there and decided to move it

 

[DannyC94]

It could be that the 1.0 is on its way to a cheap downlight, with the usual cpc problems that cheap downlights come with.

That wire is in between 2 sockets in the loft - and the earth wires have just been cut off so unsure how he got his readings?

 

[Dustydazzler]

Certainly, the not the worst consumer unit that I have seen

Just on neatness alone I would rate it 5/10

 

[westward10]

That wire is in between 2 sockets in the loft - and the earth wires have just been cut off so unsure how he got his readings?

I would strongly suggest you seek legal advice on this.

 

[DannyC94]

I would strongly suggest you seek legal advice on this.

He is supposedly coming tomorrow to fix it - or do you think it’s too bad for him to simply “just fix”? If I were to take legal advice would I need to get someone to come out an inspect it?

 

[freddo]

He is supposedly coming tomorrow to fix it - or do you think it’s too bad for him to simply “just fix”? If I were to take legal advice would I need to get someone to come out an inspect it?

The concern is he previously said it was ok to join cables with connector blocks wrapped in tape. I'm not aware that this has ever been an approved practice. (Though it was normal to tape soldered joints used on cleated wiring for example, but that has been obsolete for at least 60 years.)

This isn't a simple mistake someone has made. There are several problems shown in the photos of the connectors and it appears they were deliberately intended to be that way. No one for example accidentally cuts all the earth wires out of cables they are joining.

And is he going to retest the entire installation, and fill in the Electrical Installation Certificate fully and correctly? As a rewire is notifiable work, he must then provide a Building Regulations Compliance Certificate (this certificate will take a few days to come through).

Edit: Most legal advice, and advice from the most membership schemes will be to give the company a chance to correct all the problems first, then the legal action comes after that if the problems are not corrected properly.

 

[westward10]

He is supposedly coming tomorrow to fix it - or do you think it’s too bad for him to simply “just fix”? If I were to take legal advice would I need to get someone to come out an inspect it?

Don't let him touch it. @UNG has offered his services to look at this and I suggest you take him up on is offer. Anyone who undertakes work like this is masquerading as an electrician and is dangerous.

 

[Dustydazzler]

If it were my house I would sack off the original electricians and pay a proper electrician to come round , check everthing , test everyting and re-wire the bits that need re-wiring

 

[littlespark]

He is supposedly coming tomorrow to fix it - or do you think it’s too bad for him to simply “just fix”? If I were to take legal advice would I need to get someone to come out an inspect it?

A “just fix” may mean just making it harder to find the bodges.

For a few hundred quid, get a reputable electrician to perform an EICR on the installation as it stands… one that will stand up in court if it comes to it.

You’re going to have a fight on your hands… but these people need rooted out of the industry and punished.

 

[Dustydazzler]

A “just fix” may mean just making it harder to find the bodges.

For a few hundred quid, get a reputable electrician to perform an EICR on the installation as it stands… one that will stand up in court if it comes to it.

You’re going to have a fight on your hands… but these people need rooted out of the industry and punished.

I wouldn't hold my breath thou , I have seen and tried to help home owners get sh!t work looked at by the Scams and never has one reported case that I have know of come to anything.
In every single case the homeowner has had to pay twice to get the sh!it original work full re-done by another electrician

 

[freddo]

I wouldn't hold my breath thou , I have seen and tried to help home owners get sh!t work looked at by the Scams and never has one reported case that I have know of come to anything.
In every single case the homeowner has had to pay twice to get the sh!it original work full re-done by another electrician

It's sad that this is common. At one point we were following around a company carrying out awful work redoing and correcting etc. We tried to report them to their membership scheme but were told we couldn't as we didn't order the work. Most elderly customers don't want the extra stress of reporting, and end up paying twice. Fortunately the company is no longer trading.

Another local company was carrying out appalling fire alarm alterations, often leaving previously working systems with faults they couldn't find. It was common to find EOL devices moved to the control panel on systems they had worked on. I've just seen they are also now out of business, thank goodness.

 

[davesparks]

Don't let him touch it. @UNG has offered his services to look at this and I suggest you take him up on is offer. Anyone who undertakes work like this is masquerading as an electrician and is dangerous.

You have to allow someone the opportunity to put right mistakes or faults in their work following a complaint.

 

[Dustydazzler]

The Scams aren't interested in following up on Sh!t installs , never have been and never will

 

[davesparks]

He is supposedly coming tomorrow to fix it - or do you think it’s too bad for him to simply “just fix”? If I were to take legal advice would I need to get someone to come out an inspect it?

If you take legal advice then they will advise you on what you must do, or can do, as a next step in this.

As far as I know, and this is not legal advice, the start of the process is to make a formal complaint and allow them the opportunity to put right any unsatisfactory work.

 

[westward10]

You have to allow someone the opportunity to put right mistakes or faults in their work following a complaint.

They aren't mistakes or faults it is sheer incompetence, there is a big difference.

 

[davesparks]

They aren't mistakes or faults it is sheer incompetence, there is a big difference.

Maybe, but they still have a right to fair treatment and the opportunity to put things right.

 

[ipf]

No doubt there is some rubbish work involved, here.
But....I would never, ever, ever arrange to pay cash for a job without knowing and trusting the recipient of said cash.
All should know about quick jobs for cash. It's an invitation for crap work and rogues.
There is also the VAT avoidance issue. He must be VAT registered if avoiding it...and that could cause all sorts of problems. An arrangement to avoid would be very interesting for a certain HMRC.

 

[Baddegg]

I’d definitely recommend legal advice, and I think I’d approach in this order…

1. Put in writing to him that you have concerns and why they are and that you’d like them rectified
2. Arrange for another reputable spark to inspect and report on the install as it stands, take loads of pictures, if @UNG has offered take him up on that offer
3. Now go back to the original installer with the report and give him in writing the chance to rectify, personally I think at this stage he will break contact once he realises an actual electrician has been involved.
4 give him a week or two and keep logging your contact attempts
5. Now you can contact solicitors, his scheme, trading standards and building control

I’ve recently been involved in putting right works by a cowboy builder who fleeced the customer for £30k for some absolutely shocking works, they actually got him to court and he was prosecuted, he ended up with an 18 month suspended sentence for issuing an EIC for the electrical works despite not being an electrician!

 

[swaRRR]

It's not the worst install i've ever seen but there are some things on it that others have mentioned already.

He is supposedly coming tomorrow to fix it - or do you think it’s too bad for him to simply “just fix”? If I were to take legal advice would I need to get someone to come out an inspect it?

He's not fit to touch any electrical installation.

 

[swaRRR]

he ended up with an 18 month suspended sentence for issuing an EIC for the electrical works despite not being an electrician!

Didn't know there was a legal requirement to fill in certs? The rules as far as i know say competency is what's required. Did he get prosecuted for issuing them without competence?

 

[Baddegg]

Didn't know there was a legal requirement to fill in certs? The rules as far as i know say competency is what's required. Did he get prosecuted for issuing them without competence?

I’d imagine that’s the legal definition mate yea but ultimately the judge saw it as fraud as he had no qualifications and certainly could not have stood up and proved himself competent to carry out the works, or notify them to building control and ultimately to anyone else outside of any trade, qualifications are the basic standard to proving competent

 

[swaRRR]

I’d imagine that’s the legal definition mate yea but ultimately the judge saw it as fraud as he had no qualifications and certainly could not have stood up and proved himself competent to carry out the works, or notify them to building control and ultimately to anyone else outside of any trade, qualifications are the basic standard to proving competent

I mean you'd think at least a basic T+I cert would be required to even be allowed to carry out any work that involves testing, imo. Not even necessarily the full-fat 2391 but something that proves you can at least carry out the basic tests.

 

[Baddegg]

I mean you'd think at least a basic T+I cert would be required to even be allowed to carry out any work that involves testing, imo. Not even necessarily the full-fat 2391 but something that proves you can at least carry out the basic tests.

Carrying out the tests is one thing interpreting the results another

 

[brianmoooore]

The prosecution was more than likely for claiming to be a member of a scheme that he was not.

 

[UNG]

Didn't know there was a legal requirement to fill in certs? The rules as far as i know say competency is what's required. Did he get prosecuted for issuing them without competence?

If you were in court in the dock how would you prove beyond reasonable doubt to a judge and jury you were competent and more to the point sufficiently skilled to carry out the work / task you were contracted to do,

The problem these days is the disconnect between the theory and practical aspects of the industry and the time taken to achieve the properly skilled end result which rather than the 4 - 5 years of apprenticeship shadowing and being nurtured by skilled electricians that was the norm has now become days, weeks or a few months with the I want it now society that has appeared in the last 15 - 20 years who are easily offended when their skill level is challenged

I have a 2391 IMO it is and has become since it's introduction more worthless as time has moved on, it ticks a box for me but way back when I was at college we actually learnt how to properly test and inspect spending a lot of time on the choice of test meters and understanding the function and limitations of them it was all part of the core qualifications in becoming an electrician

If you look at BS7671 Part 2 some time ago the definition of competent person was removed and replaced by skilled person (electrically) while we have still have competent persons schemes today should these have not become skilled persons schemes or was the skillset of many of the members of competent persons deemed not to be of a level high enough to become members of a skilled persons scheme. The definition also references regulation16 of the EAWR 1989 which requires persons to be competent to prevent danger and injury and the HSE publication HSR provides guidance on this

The apprenticeship which is dismissed by some as unnecessary and is just cheap labour was an underpinning part of the transition to becoming a skilled electrician especially on site yet today's training systems seem to totally ignore that and churn out at best minimally skilled labourers who are told to get employed as improvers with little or no practical skills to improve on

How can someone carry out a proper and decent EICR's on wiring systems they have no understanding or knowledge of that can date back to 60+ years ago this is when electrics becomes more than just a few wires, an EIC on a new installation should be a little easier to establish a skill level needed to certify an installation when dealing with current wiring systems

So how would you / do you assess the skills needed to be competent to carry out an EIC or EICR, and again how would a court of law assess it

 

[DannyC94]

I’d definitely recommend legal advice, and I think I’d approach in this order…

1. Put in writing to him that you have concerns and why they are and that you’d like them rectified
2. Arrange for another reputable spark to inspect and report on the install as it stands, take loads of pictures, if @UNG has offered take him up on that offer
3. Now go back to the original installer with the report and give him in writing the chance to rectify, personally I think at this stage he will break contact once he realises an actual electrician has been involved.
4 give him a week or two and keep logging your contact attempts
5. Now you can contact solicitors, his scheme, trading standards and building control

I’ve recently been involved in putting right works by a cowboy builder who fleeced the customer for £30k for some absolutely shocking works, they actually got him to court and he was prosecuted, he ended up with an 18 month suspended sentence for issuing an EIC for the electrical works despite not being an electrician!

I had someone give me some info on the things that are wrong - and tbf the boss came yesterday and did rectify the majority of it….there’s still the issue with some of the stuff on the certificate though, and apparently I need to sign to say I don’t want surge protection? If so I wasn’t even asked about this. He was very apologetic tbf to him and brought the lad back who put them connection blocks in the loft - you could tell he wasn’t happy with him at all!

 

[swaRRR]

I had someone give me some info on the things that are wrong - and tbf the boss came yesterday and did rectify the majority of it….there’s still the issue with some of the stuff on the certificate though, and apparently I need to sign to say I don’t want surge protection? If so I wasn’t even asked about this. He was very apologetic tbf to him and brought the lad back who put them connection blocks in the loft - you could tell he wasn’t happy with him at all!

Surge protection is mandatory unless the client doesn't want it. So do you want it? Because if you do they have to install it.

And to be cynical: don't believe the theatre from 'the boss' - he knows what's going on and it's very likely he refuses to pay for proper maintenance free boxes etc which is why they have to do stuff like taping them up. I've seen these bosses before, they tell the client whatever they want to hear to pass blame onto the worker while behind closed doors they're cheap and ruthless.

 

[Baddegg]

I had someone give me some info on the things that are wrong - and tbf the boss came yesterday and did rectify the majority of it….there’s still the issue with some of the stuff on the certificate though, and apparently I need to sign to say I don’t want surge protection? If so I wasn’t even asked about this. He was very apologetic tbf to him and brought the lad back who put them connection blocks in the loft - you could tell he wasn’t happy with him at all!

Personally you’d be mad to sign a form regarding something that should’ve been but in and wouldn’t have cost much at all….the same goes for the quality of consumer unit you’ve got, the difference between that and a better brand with surge included along with each circuit being protected by an individual rcbo is probably around £100….he has really scrimped on the materials on your instal which to me reflects his attitude to his work,
Fair play to him for coming back but I can’t imagine he’s rectified all that needs doing after the pics we’ve seen, for instance why was his reasoning behind removing the cpcs on the “spur” he’d installed?
Obviously he’s thrown the lad under the bus, but EVERYTHING someone in his employment does is his responsibility even more so for a trainee…..
I’d also be very sceptical of any new certification you received as he’s made it up once how will know he’s done it properly again…..
But ultimately all we can do is advise and give the benefit of our experience, it’s your sons house and he sleeps there…..

 

[UNG]

I had someone give me some info on the things that are wrong - and tbf the boss came yesterday and did rectify the majority of it….there’s still the issue with some of the stuff on the certificate though, and apparently I need to sign to say I don’t want surge protection? If so I wasn’t even asked about this. He was very apologetic tbf to him and brought the lad back who put them connection blocks in the loft - you could tell he wasn’t happy with him at all!

Did he carry out anymore testing so he can fill in the values that are missing on the certificate?
Having looked at the certificate again I think the guy needs to proof read it as well as some of the values look a bit mixed up