Change in the Law regarding RCDs in Rental Properties

[Spazz]

This is where the rental property licence will come in - same as gas - who enforces that - the LAPP do!
At the moment the nearly all LAPP request copies of all Gas Certs so wait for this to become law inline with gas then then the LAPP can request these as well - until such time nothing can be enforced!

 

[UNG]

If you forward all EDNs to LAPP they dont contact you unless you request it! It takes less than 2 mins!

You say if you want to be out of work - this is what Gas does and they are still in work!

Plus how many of these landlords actually act on your recommendations - some but not all - the ones who act on your recommendations do you really need to fill in a EDN - NO!
Only those who dont act on your recommendations within a set time need to be reported to LAPP.

Like I said they problem is us!

Plus in regards the untrained are not a problem - yes they take work off us - but thats our personal problem!
When they do it right its fine - when they do it wrong you issue a EDN or advisory and that gets reported to LAPP - same thing!

The bigger problem is that some of us are willing to sign off work that we have not done! or seen done!

In Gas the home owner can do his own work and report it to the LABC - SAME AS WITH ELECTRIC!

The only difference is that the gas engineers dont stand by and allow dangerous installs to remain in houses - some of us do because we dont want the agro, because we dont want to fill in a form for free. THE PROBLEM IS OUR ATTITUDE!

Yes in an ideal world only trained and licensed persons will do the work - those who blame the system should be looking at themselves first!

Would you like to qualify your comment as I think the problem is your social crusade I have no intention of following your Faceache Twoddle I certainly won't be contacting my MP other than to reduce the red tape and hoops I have to jump through to carry on my trade. I find it abhorrant that you continue to blame myself and others on here and in the wider world with your comment that "the problem is us" when the problem is these quick narrow course training providers backed by incompetent scams

The problem is the EICR is like an MOT all opinions and findings are those of the inspector installations can be wired to possibly any one of 4 different editions of regs with a number of amendments all were compliant and probably still are compliant to the regs they are wired to. Are you suggesting that all installations should be wired and updated to the latest regs because they may be dangerous if they are not

IMO the EDN is the worst piece of paper ever produced and seems to be issued at times for no good reason by lesser experienced sparks other than the installation didn't comply with the 17th edition and they had no knowledge of past regs

 

[Spazz]

Would you like to qualify your comment as I think the problem is your social crusade I have no intention of following your Faceache Twoddle I certainly won't be contacting my MP other than to reduce the red tape and hoops I have to jump through to carry on my trade. I find it abhorrant that you continue to blame myself and others on here and in the wider world with your comment that "the problem is us" when the problem is these quick narrow course training providers backed by incompetent scams

The problem is the EICR is like an MOT all opinions and findings are those of the inspector installations can be wired to possibly any one of 4 different editions of regs with a number of amendments all were compliant and probably still are compliant to the regs they are wired to. Are you suggesting that all installations should be wired and updated to the latest regs because they may be dangerous if they are not

IMO the EDN is the worst piece of paper ever produced and seems to be issued at times for no good reason by lesser experienced sparks other than the installation didn't comply with the 17th edition and they had no knowledge of past regs

You have completely got the wrong end of the stick!

The problem is us - purely because we are on here having a moan about the Part P. Your problem is not with Part P - your problem is with that European Law thats states that anyone can carry out any work themselves without having to get a skilled trade in to do it! Thats the problem which I agree! - That cant be changed as it effects 27 different countries

Again your having a moan about the EDN - that bit of paper is not the worst thing - the problem is that less experienced sparks dont know how to use it! - again Us - word us as in all sparks in UK - some know how to use this and some dont!

Electrical Regs apply to everything that we install - I am not looking at them at all!
All I am looking at tis rental properties - the landlord has a duty to provide and maintain a safe working electrical system that wont cause harm to their tenants!
A fault is an unplanned so to ensure that the landlord can comply with the law the installation must be tested and isolate when a fault occurs

The Landlord has to provide a safe system even if a fault occurs! How can said landlord maintain a safe system if the electric is still on and a fault has occurred - THEY CANT! - they are breaking the law then!

This addition with shock protection (RCD/RCBO/any others which are or come on the market) and EICRs is to clearly state what the landlord has to do to comply with the above legal requirement.
The problem is Law is not as straight forward as it should be - there are so many loops and holes which can be picked at - this is one of them!

In regards to the problem is us - yes it is - it is our attitude that we cant do work that we are not being paid for!

Law cant be enforced unless someone with the training and equipment (for electrical) is available to report it - believe it or not these EHP are not trained nor do they have the equipment to carry out everything they have to enforce. plus if they did they would be doing EICRs themselves! - which Im sure you would all moan about!

So they relay on a skilled trade to identify these problems so they can report them. Nothing to do with 17th Regs or what ever! If an install is dangerous then we have a duty of care to do something about it (and that is Law!) so those of us who walk away from a dangerous install without doing anything about it then they are breaking the law!

Imagine you saw a bear mains cable hanging free - the home owner would not let you fix it - you didn't issue a EDN because your not paid to do it - and yo have not reported it - if someone comes into contact with that and is killed and someone proved that you saw it - i.e. you quoted for it - you would have to explain to the wigs why you didn't fulfill your legal requirement of the Duty of Care (HASWA 1974) - GOOD LUCK!

If the licencing comes into force like it has in Scotland then that will enforce it - like what happens with Gas - then we wont have to report it - it will be down to the homeowner (landlord) to report it with producing the EICR. That EICR then becomes a MOT - which its not at the moment - its an advisory - nothing more!

A MOT tells the car owner what they must do to comply with the law (in regards to cars) - The EICR does not! - The EICR is like a Pre-MOT - no legal requirement at all!
There needs to be a MOT for Electrics which there is not at the moment!

 

[Spazz]

I am not having a dig at anyone

Just think of it this way - you install a new CU - but instead of installing a 17th Ed board you install a BS3036 - your still within the law but you have not followed your recommendations that are set down by BS7671 - you will be found guilty on the basis this the courts will use the BS7671
Your only defense is: at the time I left the property that install was safe - you might be lucky if the fault was a result of someone putting a nail through the wire - hence killing the person - it was safe but the person affected the safety - getting you off.

Exactly the same as if you install a 17th Ed CU and the home owner opened it up and touched the main supply cable - not your fault - its theirs! - Saving your A***

 

[spark 68]

If the licencing comes into force like it has in Scotland then that will enforce it - like what happens with Gas - then we wont have to report it - it will be down to the homeowner (landlord) to report it with producing the EICR. That EICR then becomes a MOT - which its not at the moment - its an advisory - nothing more!

That is broadly what I was suggesting in post #94.

The rules for this already exist, the LABC or council could demand to see the EICR and enforce the remedial work if required, if they so choose.
They don't do this normally, except in a couple of regeneration schemes in run down areas, and what is the betting they only do this if there is some financial benefit to themselves ?, ie. a Government grant from central Government.

The parts of existing laws that need to be enforced correctly should put more legal onus on the landlord, after all they are getting rent on a weekly basis.

This should have nothing to do with us, except to carry out the work within our usual legal framework (within BS7671, building regs etc.).

Nicholas, have a look at title of this thread again, how can you change the regs/law for just rental properties ?, I feel that this will lead to unintended consequences, as we all know the powers that be could not organise a party in a brewery.

As UNG said, we are not here to police an already crap system.

Edit: They cannot even implement the existing powers correctly, what makes you think new laws would fair any better.

 

[Spazz]

Spark this is not the case - the LABC have nothing to do with anything after its been signed off. I thought they did but they dont. All powers go over the the Public Protection/Housing/Environmental Health Department (all depends whic the council call it).
They can request to see the EICR but they cant demand to see it as there is no legal requirement to have one done (unless your a HMO). Same as the Gas.

Only the court can demand a EICR to be completed!


The Housing Act applies to rental properties under the landlord & Tenant Regulations - this is where this will need to be put in - same as with HMOs.

Im not saying we are the police - what I am saying is we have the same rights and responsibilities as Gas Safe Engineers but we dont use them. The only difference between us and Gas is that there is a legal requirement for Gas to be inspected evey year in rental properties.

Everyone says that it wont work because its not policed/reinforced but it works with Gas - there is no difference apart from the law with gas and lack of a law with electric. They need to be put together.

Same as there is a law to include a cut off for gas if there is a fire detected - same thing as a RCD - cuts off the electric when a fault is detected.

 

[Spazz]

For those who are not in Gas - the regulation (Part of the Housing Act) The Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 is what states that Gas Safety Certificates must be carried out - this would have to be done for Electrical.

Check this Reg out and you will see that it can easily be changed into Electrical

 

[spark 68]

Nicholas,

Don't get me wrong, Iam not having a go or anything.

However, I still think that if anything, laws or otherwise need changing, then it should be to the licensing model for landlords, and should be just that, and I still maintain this has nothing to do with us as electricians except for any work/alterations, building regs, EICR's etc. which has enough rules and regs as it is, or don't you think we are legislated enough as electricians already?

There are various laws already in place, duty of care for tenants, all reasonable precautions (131 BGB) etc. (Iam not a lawyer), don't you find it strange that councils and local authorities can find legislation for the most petty of reasons when it suits them ?, and also ignore other arguably more important things when it suits them ?

Good luck with your crusade

 

[oldtimer]

I hate to be negitive but in this current economical climate the word is out not to hike up regulations but to tear some down so me thinks the treading of water will take place the problem we have is that the lawmakers cosy relationship with the people who drive the regulations I have been around long enough to see how it operates a bit like a MP on a bank commitee then 3 months after they loose their seat they get a new one on the bank board in other words a bit like a MOD cival servant

 

[Spazz]

I fully agree spark. Yes the licencing needs to come in - no questions asked!
The problem is that unless the mandatory EICR comes in as well then the licencing cant enforce anything to do with electrics at all!
The Shock Protection is an added bonus for those tenants whos landlords are so far up their on a*** who refuse to fit them and feel that the old BS3036 CU is more than enough to comply with the law which its not.

How often is everyone here going into rental properties and its more than clear that the landlord does not care about the safety of his tenants - as long as his money comes in thats all he cares about!

All I said about our duties is that at present we are the only ones who can identify problems and we should if needed report them - and only if we feel that the landlord in question really does not care about the safety of his tenants.

Im not saying by any means report every little thing - no way on this earth!

I am only talking about things like life threatening situations - bear cables where children/young adults can come into contact with them.

Sorry I would not think twice about that - I could not sleep at night knowing that if I had reported it that child could still be alive now! And Im sure you all are the same!

 

[Geoffsd]

I think it should be remembered that landlords are not killing off vast hoards of their tenants and unless you can provide irrefutable statistics on the actual number of people killed and injured I'm afraid your crusade seems like a personal vendetta against anyone who lets properties.

Do you have a disproportionate number of Rachmans in your local area?

Just campaigning for the fitting of RCDs is a waste of time.


PS - What's wrong with 3036s? After all, they are fail-safe, unlike RCDs.

 

[Spazz]

Personal vendetta against anyone who lets properties - how can you say this when my grandfather owns 15 properties that he lets out.
This is completely the opposite! This is purely to assist landlords to maintain a safe property to let.

Stats for rental properties is not available as no-one has collected these.

Geoffsd - reread the whole thread! I am looking at 2 main changes!
1. Shock Protection in all rental houses
2. EICRs every 5 years in rental properties (or every year)

Part of this is then to ensure bonding is in place as well but that is under the both.

 

[Geoffsd]

Personal vendetta against anyone who lets properties - how can you say this when my grandfather owns 15 properties that he lets out.

Either I missed that or this is the first mention of it.

How many has he killed? (No need to answer)

This is completely the opposite! This is purely to assist landlords to maintain a safe property to let.

Assist? As already said, there are laws to do this but they are not enforced.
Good landlords don't need it. Bad ones won't take any notice.

Britain is very good at making laws and not enforcing them.
When something goes wrong it is then stated that someone was acting illegally.

Stats for rental properties is not available as no-one has collected these.

Do you not think they would be if it were a problem?

Geoffsd - reread the whole thread! I am looking at 2 main changes!

Oh. No.

1. Shock Protection in all rental houses

There already is a lot.

2. EICRs every 5 years in rental properties (or every year)

What about P.A.T. as well which, if you think about it, is more related to the Gas Safety Check.

It is an appliance check with an integral test to ensure the permanent installation is not leaking.

Part of this is then to ensure bonding is in place as well but that is under the both.

I don't understand why you emphasize particular items.

Why did the original question not read 'Change the law requiring EICRs in Rental Properties'.

 

[Spazz]

There is NO law to state that EICRs must be carried out! - Only recommendations
There is NO law that shock protection must be installed! - Only recommendations
Laws to protect Landlords - the main ones like Gas Safety is enforced very well! the other main one is the landlord must supply and maintain a good condition property - same as electric supplies - very blunt!

With regards to PAT Testing honestly how many houses have appliances in them? yes some but not all! The tenant supplies the appliances so its down to them to make sure they are safe - not the landlord!
Only the cooker usually (if electric) is supplied by the landlord!

Also think about it - if a property has an RCD installed does it really matter if the appliances are tested? - NO - any faults that occur with the appliances the RCD will pick it up.

I cant claim the idea for changing the law in regards to EICRs because ESC started this a few years back! but only with a press release!

The Laws about Gas Safety is managed very well by the LA. When and only when the licencing comes into force they will be able to fully enforce gas and electric (if EICRs become law!)

The main reason for RCDs, is apart from shock protection they will reduce the number of fires in properties started by electrical installations and supplies - how - by tripping before a fire starts!

In regards to stats these are impossible to get for rental properties! Everyone who is electrocuted goes to Hospital (not counting minor shocks), the hospitals notify the HSE and the HSE produce the stats.
Hospitals DONT care if the patient is renting or owning the property they live in!

 

[spark 68]

Geoffsd - are you an electrician because your really not acting like one!
Quite clearly you dont understand the principle of safe installations and what is law already!

Now, Now, Nicholas,
You are barely out of nappies yourself from what I have read of your other posts, apologise to Geoff and retract that remark please, let's keep this civil.

 

[Spazz]

Geoffsd - sorry but you really annoyed me when you clearly dint understand the basics of why RCDs are important and why EICRs are important!
It appears that you are just looking for an argument!

Just to let all know what I am now doing:
I have emailed all councils in Wales and gotten over 50% of them back - all supporting this.
I am now emailing all 27 councils and their Borough Councils to get their view on this.

 

[Geoffsd]

Thank you spark 68.

Nicholas, there are so many flaws, inaccuracies and irrelevancies in your last post I shall let everyone else make their own deductions.

Edit - second last post now.

 

[Spazz]

You say there are flaws but when I PM you asking you to explain them you dont respond!

Can you please state what flaws and if there are already laws which are doing what I am trying to do please state the law as I have missed them so have all the county councils that have responded to me along with all on here who support this!

 

[Geoffsd]

I have been asked to respond.

There is NO law to state that EICRs must be carried out! - Only recommendations
There is NO law that shock protection must be installed! - Only recommendations

The law states that a landlord has a duty of care to ensure that the electrical installation is safe.

I do not object to a law requiring EICRs to be introduced although you started the thread by requiring RCDs to be fitted. This would require CU changes and would not happen.

Also, the figures you quote are hugely more than any I have previously read since Part P was first suggested.

However, the situation would arise, as is now the case where letting agents demand an electrical report, disreputable landlords will hire disreputable electricians who will walk round and then sign a piece of paper for fifty pounds.

Laws to protect Landlords - the main ones like Gas Safety is enforced very well! the other main one is the landlord must supply and maintain a good condition property - same as electric supplies - very blunt!

Laws are not to protect landlords.

With regards to PAT Testing honestly how many houses have appliances in them? yes some but not all!The tenant supplies the appliances so its down to them to make sure they are safe - not the landlord!Only the cooker usually (if electric) is supplied by the landlord!

All of them have appliances. Cooker, boiler, fires, even if unfurnished.
Furnished properties have the same number as you do.

You did not seem to grasp my point about the Gas Safety Check being an appliance check.
It does not have the same number of tests and measurements and disruption that an EICR would.

Also think about it - if a property has an RCD installed does it really matter if the appliances are tested? - NO - any faults that occur with the appliances the RCD will pick it up.

Well, yes it does matter.

An RCD is only addition protection for the electrical installation.
Surely, you are not suggesting that faulty appliances would be acceptable as long as an RCD was present.
RCDs are not infallible. They are not a magic solution to all our problems.

I cant claim the idea for changing the law in regards to EICRs because ESC started this a few years back! but only with a press release!

That would be to judge if others thought it important.
Perhaps they got told to bury it by larger landlords than your Grandfather.

The Laws about Gas Safety is managed very well by the LA. When and only when the licencing comes into force they will be able to fully enforce gas and electric (if EICRs become law!)

I cannot argue that point but I do not think the LA 'check up'.
More likely just prosecute when the occasion arises.

The main reason for RCDs, is apart from shock protection they will reduce the number of fires in properties started by electrical installations and supplies - how - by tripping before a fire starts!

RCDs will help should a person touch a live conductor BUT RCDs do not recognise overcurrent so are unlikely to help against fires.
The fuse/MCB will do this.

Is this a misunderstanding leading you to believe that fuses are not as safe as MCBs.
I note you did not respond to my query regarding 3036s.

In regards to stats these are impossible to get for rental properties! Everyone who is electrocuted goes to Hospital (not counting minor shocks), the hospitals notify the HSE and the HSE produce the stats.
Hospitals DONT care if the patient is renting or owning the property they live in!

Perhaps, but if it became apparent that large numbers of people who rented were being injured by faulty electricals something would soon be done. I would think that the hospital staff DO care - that's what they DO do.


Just to add - Sometimes the best ideas, for some reason, do not work in the real world.

 

[Spazz]

I agree with your comments!

I have been asked to respond.

The law states that a landlord has a duty of care to ensure that the electrical installation is safe. - This is a blanket reg any noone knows what the have to do - nor do the EHPs

I do not object to a law requiring EICRs to be introduced although you started the thread by requiring RCDs to be fitted. This would require CU changes and would not happen. -The problem with the older CUs is that most of them dont have bonding in place. An RCD is not notifiable therefore dos not require an electrician. even though an electrician would be a way better option (I dont agree with landords doing their own work but it happens). A CU change costs £300 - £450 - thats 1 months rent!

Also, the figures you quote are hugely more than any I have previously read since Part P was first suggested. - I made a mistake in the OP - it was corrected later on in the thread

However, the situation would arise, as is now the case where letting agents demand an electrical report, disreputable landlords will hire disreputable electricians who will walk round and then sign a piece of paper for fifty pounds. - Agents or LAs cant demand EICRs they can only request them - if they demand one then the landlord (at present) will have a case against them in court - recent case about this in NewPort Gwent - LA lost!

Laws are not to protect landlords. - If there where not laws then more people will be killed - Landlords think they are a pain but they do protect them!

All of them have appliances. Cooker, boiler, fires, even if unfurnished. - Gas appliances are inspected with the gas safety cert - like I said before if the property has a RCD installed then even if the appliance goes faulty the RCD will protect it
Furnished properties have the same number as you do.

You did not seem to grasp my point about the Gas Safety Check being an appliance check. -I fully understand this
It does not have the same number of tests and measurements and disruption that an EICR would. -Electric is more complicated than gas - more of a reason to have it tested more often!

Well, yes it does matter. - As below

An RCD is only addition protection for the electrical installation. - RCD is additional protection but it is also the only device that will stop an electric shock and fire starting! Bonding does not do this!
Surely, you are not suggesting that faulty appliances would be acceptable as long as an RCD was present. - Faulty appliances would not allow the RCD to stay connected - it would keep triping - insulation goes on appliance then the RCD will trip!
RCDs are not infallible. They are not a magic solution to all our problems. - RCDs are only problematic when you have a faulty installation. A good installation wont trip the RCD! If the RCD trips then your losing the current to something else or earth - RCD is doing its job 100%

That would be to judge if others thought it important.
Perhaps they got told to bury it by larger landlords than your Grandfather. - They never approached parliament about it - their biggest problem was they put it in the papers and that was it -no reasons behind it!

I cannot argue that point but I do not think the LA 'check up'.
More likely just prosecute when the occasion arises. - Classic example of who does this protect - the landlord - landlord did their job - LA failed - whos to blame - LA. This is all down to training of LA

RCDs will help should a person touch a live conductor BUT RCDs do not recognise overcurrent so are unlikely to help against fires.
The fuse/MCB will do this. - RCDs do look for overcurrent! (not designed to but they do) - 63A - 30mA. They are looking for both! If a fire starts a short to earth normally happens when the MCB does not trip - to high of resistance - the RCD will pick this up! Like you said the MCB is in charge of overcurrent - but clearly over-current is not the main cause of fire - or there would not be fires from electrical.

Is this a misunderstanding leading you to believe that fuses are not as safe as MCBs.
I note you did not respond to my query regarding BS3036s. - Big problem with BS3036 - fuse cable can be replaced with 2.5 cable - this will not blow! - meaning they have the potential to be very dangerous!

Perhaps, but if it became apparent that large numbers of people who rented were being injured by faulty electricals something would soon be done. I would think that the hospital staff DO care - that's what they DO do.
- I used to work for Welsh Ambulance Service until I bust my back - they dont care where the person comes from - their priority is to care about the person not their house! Only way to look at how many are in rentals is to look at how many landlords are jailed!

Just to add - Sometimes the best ideas, for some reason, do not work in the real world.

-You never know till you try it! If noone tried electric then we would not have it now! Sometimes you have to go with your gut and sometimes they payoff! - Think about it - why did the law get passed about gas safety checks when less people where killed from CO poisoning compared to Electric - because someone in the Fire Brigade brought it to the attention of Parliament and it got passed