Amending an EICR

[Camlington]

A landlord obtained an unsatisfactory EICR having a C2 for a 6mm T+E cable on 63a fuse for main cable. Works to remedy this were carried out some 3 months later after the tenants had left. The same electrician then issued a satisfactory EICR having the same report reference number and backdated to the original inspection date. Is this acceptable?

 

[i=p/u]

Doesnt always go to plan like 123.

Its been tested and faults fixed, test cert issued.

 

[DPG]

A landlord obtained an unsatisfactory EICR having a C2 for a 6mm T+E cable on 63a fuse for main cable. Works to remedy this were carried out some 3 months later after the tenants had left. The same electrician then issued a satisfactory EICR having the same report reference number and backdated to the original inspection date. Is this acceptable?

Did you get a MWC or EIC for the work done?

 

[Camlington]

Did you get a MWC or EIC for the work done?

No. All that got issued was what in my mind is a misleading backdated amended EICR. All the test readings are exactly the same as the original and nothing to say what work was done.

 

[i=p/u]

The guy has probably just said fix the faults on the paperwork and il give you the certification of satisfactory

 

[DPG]

No. All that got issued was what in my mind is a misleading backdated amended EICR. All the test readings are exactly the same as the original and nothing to say what work was done.

That's the problem. The cert for the new cable, or whatever work was done, should have a certificate and have the test results for it. The work has apparently been done but there is no evidence of what has been done, and no results of any subsequent testing.

That's how I'm seeing it anyway.

 

[telectrix]

original EICR should have been left as was and accompanied by an EIC for the remedial works, with reference on EIC to EICR.

 

[Camlington]

That's the problem. The cert for the new cable, or whatever work was done, should have a certificate and have the test results for it. The work has apparently been done but there is no evidence of what has been done, and no results of any subsequent testing.

That's how I'm seeing it anyway.

original EICR should have been left as was and accompanied by an EIC for the remedial works, with reference on EIC to EICR.

That is how I see it as well. Thanks for confirming.

 

[Camlington]

I have raised this issue with the landlord and he has now provided a further EICR from the electrician with the same original report reference but now dated 1st March when the work was carried out. No EIC. Should I report this to NICEIC?

 

[UNG]

No EIC. Should I report this to NICEIC?

Good luck with that one if you don't get anywhere with the NICEIC you could always try UKAS

 

[timhoward]

The sparks is just being lazy. They already have most of the EIC answers from the EICR. It would take 20 minutes to test the new circuit, then it's just a bit of paperwork. It's also in their own interest to be able to refer back to a completely accurate EICR next time around.
It's concerning that the point of an EICR is to test the fixed wiring, and it's resulted in untested/undocumented fixed wiring.
In 5 years there's also a possibility that someone will loop test the new circuit and just copy the old circuits continuity and IR readings without a second thought.

 

[GGUpton]

If the main supply cables were 6mm and now been replaced to larger size csa ,then surely the installations results will all have changed?? New test sheets required ??

 

[timhoward]

If the main supply cables were 6mm and now been replaced to larger size csa ,then surely the installations results will all have changed?? New test sheets required ??

I'd missed that this thread was about the main supply, so yes, the Zs will reduce for all circuits.
If there is an R1+R2 available for all the circuits, or a previous Zs@DB recorded there wouldn't be a need to retest everything as the new results can be calculated.