- Reaction score
- 874
as the old addage goes you can lead a horse to water ......................................
......... but you can't make it brush it's teeth.
Discuss Customer won't pay to correct dangerous wiring in the Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
as the old addage goes you can lead a horse to water ......................................
Now I know what TNS stands for.....
(Total Nanny State)
I wholly disagree, Protecting other occupants who have no other way to protect themselves (i.e. kids, the severely disabled etc) from the primary occupier's criminal stupidity is something that needs to be sorted out. Instead seemingly some would rather the problem stay ignored, either electrics is a professional trade and takes on the responsibility of having the power cut off when things are not safe.
The solution to cowboys cutting power off could be as simple as an intermediary, disagree with the power being shut off, someone sent out, if they agree the fault is serious enough to warrant the shut off, it stays shut off, customer (potentially) gets a bill for the inspection, if its a cowboy seeking work, then power goes back on and they get stick / prosecuted.
I think taking it through insurance is the best solution (inspection every 5 to 10 years (unless wiring aged and in need of modernisation / alterations planned), central database of when the last check was done and any notes made about the installation with digital photos of areas needing attention (if we really want to be watertight)
People wouldn't have it, some cry.....all it takes is a few kids to die in a housefire due to bad electrics and the "think of children brigade" will be looking for a target to blame and if they realise that the gas guys would have shut off the gas, then they will wonder why the spark didn't shut off the power if it was that bad. Alongside the usual sue first think later mentality, using the cover of "ordinary person" who isn't legally expected to know the dangers of electricity, compared with instructed and competent persons, who are expected to understand the dangers and act accordingly.
tbh I see this turning into a right royal mess and bad law unless something is done pre-emptively to try and push for semi-sane law
The problem with that is unless we have been using a tradesman/woman for a long time we do not trust them. There are too many programs on TV telling us that there are cowboys everywhere. Also the system would be abused by people disconnecting the electricity for "mayor faults" which are not, just to get more money out of the customer... we all know it would happen.
The few always spoil things for the many!!!
Now I know what TNS stands for.....
(Total Nanny State)
What I had in mind was a form dropped into the electricity authority so that they would do the disconnecting. This would stop any abuse of the system. They would also have the right of entry, as does the gas board (or whatever they call themselves this week)
Sorry but this is a complete nonsense the utility companies already have a statutory right of access to your property to check their equipment ie diddling the meter and also we are not the secret police we cannot go about informing on anybody because we have an ego that elevates us to demigod level.
So here is the deal under contract law you are only obliged to give the tenant a quotation and any work done is covered under your PL insurance if you wish to deal out advise then you better have PI insurance to back you up dont get me wrong we can sit here and discuss this until we get to 10 pages but nothing is going to change any time soon ie the current economical environment will not allow any more regulation good God the scheme providors can barely cope with counting their cash and trying to sort out the EICR debacle let alone introduce an "ElectroSafe" system we are already a joke in the industry without this nonsense its not that I do not care but I or you cannot be the safety man for all electrical installations remember we did not get RCDs because we wanted to improve safety we got them because some poor MPs daughter died in an accident at home.
Gas installations have the potential to destroy lives and properties of the local area,carbon monoxide poisoning is a silent killer and can kill innocent people
I would expect that these 2 problems kill more people than the 12 or so per year that electrical installations account for
You can protect your electrical installation,but you can do nothing about next doors gas
I think people should balance responsibility of the individual with interference and choice by the authorities
Its fine to make someone aware of a problem that could affect them.its another to interfere to the point that you are the custodian of their own responsibilities
Interference by Government in this industry has been amateur and a shambles up till now and is better left alone
If they did try and enforce some sort of testing regime that was compulsory,do you think they are firstly justified in interfering and secondly what sort of mayhem and criminal acts will they be allowing for the unscrupulous to legally enact
Just my 2p, feel free to disagree
See situations like this really needs something like an electrical version of gassafe brought in (with better oversight, don't know how good gassafe is, but have seen some real cowboys who were corgi registered in the past) or a requirement for regular inspections from someone who doesn't do the remedial work to assure impartiality (in theory at least)
Our system is a mess, no way to force it to be remedied, too many willing to look the other way as "we've done it that way for years" or "the customer doesn't want to pay for it to be done right" "the customer wants it done this way, who am I to argue?"
I'd be happy with a system of required inspections say backed by the insurance industry - "no electrical safety cert, no policy pay out" which would persuade many to make sure it was done. The issue is making sure shonky certs don't get issued, which could be a real sticking point.
What do others think?
What i would have done is told him what is required to install his cooker circuit and then if I found something else which needed attention I would have made a note on the neccesary paperwork and let the customer decide from there.If I found something that was very unsafe then I would remove the fuse to that circuit and fill out the neccesary paperwork.If then the customer puts that fuse back in then thats his look out.
wouldnt work in a million years, electricians given the right to condemm an installation, even get it isolated until it is put "right" how many duff sparks out there would be issuing these at the merest hint of something not complying to current regs even though it might be perfectly safe? how many times on this forum has the question popped up wether an old 3036 needs a new fuseboard or even a complete re-wire, the other day i did some work at a school and they had just had their 5 year PIR back, loads of code 2's some of them for real stupid stuff like screw missing on fuseboard cover!!! i mean, code 3 or 4 but not a bloody 2!!!
and with the new codings even less choice, if it aint code 3 its unsatisfactory, As it stands a dangerous condition notice can be issued, as proof you have made the situation aware, if sparks were given the power to do anymore than i reckon people really would feel bullied into having work done that may or may not be dangerous,thus no-one will want to call a proper spark and that would open the door even further for the cowboys to come in and do it cheap,at least this way the responsibility lies with them
Reply to Customer won't pay to correct dangerous wiring in the Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.