HELP my company has signed off work I haven’t done in my name

[Pez5480]

My company have fully signed a test certificate in my name on a job that I have not been to, worked on or tested.

The work was done by a 4th year apprentice and tested by him as well. The test certificate was also filled incorrectly.

Is this illegal? And what would you guys do about this?

Cheers

 

[123]

I'd speak to them about it. Why have they signed it in your name?

 

[Pez5480]

I'd speak to them about it. Why have they signed it in your name?

I’m the only qualified electrician in the company and the only one with test and inspect.

Definitely going to speak to them about! But would this be illegal? Technically the job not been checked by a qualified persons

 

[SparkySy]

I would definitely be speaking to your company, that really isn't on!
Make all correspondence via email so you have a record of your concerns and the answers given, that way you have a paper trail to follow.
If anything happens your name is on that cert as the QS!

 

[littlespark]

They forged your signature?

That’s fraud.


all they need to do is put you on the job and get you to test what the 4th year has done. If it’s ok, then sign it yourself.
Otherwise put your foot down. They can’t continue operating if you’re the only one that can test.

 

[Pez5480]

Thank you, would you say

I would definitely be speaking to your company, that really isn't on!
Make all correspondence via email so you have a record of your concerns and the answers given, that way you have a paper trail to follow.
If anything happens your name is on that cert as the QS!

thank you,
Would you say this illegal? Is anything is wrong I’m done for

 

[Pez5480]

They forged your signature?

That’s fraud.


all they need to do is put you on the job and get you to test what the 4th year has done. If it’s ok, then sign it yourself.
Otherwise put your foot down. They can’t continue operating if you’re the only one that can test.

We use the niceic online cert, you upload your details to it and just click the person that done the work and it fills it out and puts your signature on it as well

 

[littlespark]

What is the point of a personal signature being able to be inserted by anyone?
Kind of defeats the purpose doesn’t it?

You must start a discussion with the company saying you’re not happy.
If something does go wrong on this job, you can show evidence that you knew this was wrong and tried to address it.

How good is this 4th year apprentice? I’ve known some that still couldn’t work out simple 2 way lighting.

 

[pc1966]

Would you say this illegal? Is anything is wrong I’m done for

I am no solicitor but if they are signing in your name without you inspecting then it is fraud.

You definitely have to raise this with them and keep your own trail of correspondence just in case. That means something like your own email account (not a company one that can be deleted "by accident").

Having someone else do the work and a qualified person check and verify testing is fine, but forging your approval is very VERY dodgy.

 

[Pez5480]

What is the point of a personal signature being able to be inserted by anyone?
Kind of defeats the purpose doesn’t it?

You must start a discussion with the company saying you’re not happy.
If something does go wrong on this job, you can show evidence that you knew this was wrong and tried to address it.

How good is this 4th year apprentice? I’ve known some that still couldn’t work out simple 2 way lighting.

Yeah it’s not very fail safe as anyone can fill out the certs

As for the 4th year, I got a phone call while they was working on this job saying him and the plumbers are getting electric shocks from everything they touch, told them to check the houses earthing a bonding and they found the bonding was disconnected, apparently this fixed the issue

 

[pc1966]

Sadly I would refer to the fatal accident inquiry that was reported on the IET forum a while back. Here are a copy of the details and why you need to be careful:

"The case relates to the Death of 22 year old Emma Shaw who was the occupant with her 18 child month of a rented 1st floor flat in West Bromwich in December 2007.

The flat was one of new 42 flats that had electrical installation carried out by Anchor Building and Electrical services an NICEIC Approved Contractor in 2006.

The internal walls were constructed of "C" section metal studwork covered with plasterboard. A hall cupboard contained a pressurised water boiler above which was mounted a consumer unit supplied from a distribution circuit from a switch fuse in a an riser cupboard external to the flat. The means of earthing was TN-C-S. None of the circuits in the consumer unit were RCD protected. Circuit No. 3 supplied one of the immersion heaters in the boiler.

The electrical installation had been 1st fixed the plaster board fitted to the metal studding before the installation was 2nd fixed. Circuit 3 supplied a 20A double pole switch at high level which supplied a cable outlet at low level, this in turn supplied the water heater in flex.

The cable to the flex outlet was longer than it should be and when the plasterboard was installed the cable was trapped between the plasterboard and the stud-work. In addition a plasterboard screw passed through the cable clipping the Line and CPC conductors and in to the studwork.

The installation had been energised without any testing and the fault current had blown away part of the screw and CPC. This was verified by forensic examination at the HSE laboratories. This left a high resistance fault from the line conductor to the metal studwork.

18 months later the stat. on the water heater failed and the cylinder over pressurised and the safety valve operated and the safety valve operated and discharged in to a tun dish. The plastic waste pipe from the tun dish had parted because it was not glued and the water spilled on to the floor soaking the carpet. The water soaked under the foot of the wall and in to contact with the live studwork.

Miss Shaw was mopping up the water and had texted her partner to come home telling him the hall was flooded and the "electricity was sparking". he partner texted back to say to turn off the water stop cock sited in the same cupboard as the boiler.

Later she was found kneeling in the cupboard slumped forward and apparently lifeless. Subsequent examination and a Post Mortum determined that she was kneeling in the charged water and received a fatal shock when she touched the earthed stop valve.

West Midlands Police, the ambulance service and the fire service attended the scene. The police commenced an investigation for a suspicious death.

The police later arrested both the QS Hoult and Tomkins the electricians mate and they were interviewed under caution. Tomkins had signed an Electrical Installation Certificate as the Inspector. He admitted he was not qualified or competent to do so. He said he had been taken to the flat by the electrical site foreman and told to do ring continuity and loop impedance testing.He said when he got to the flat the installation was already energised. He did no other inspection and testing. He said that in the site hut they had sat around the table with the site foreman and was told the other tests had been done and he was told what to write on the test certificate.

This EIC was submitted to Anchors offices where a type written certificate was produced. The type written version had differences to Tomkins hand written version. The typed version had "P/P C Tomkins" in the single signature box for design. construction and inspection. Tomkins said in court he had not seen the typed form and he would not have consented to his signature being used. Mr Hoult the QS said that he just checked the figures on the form and signed it as the QS. he did not go to site and was not involved in the testing and inspection. Mr Hoult had known Tomkins for many years and it was alleged he knew about Tomkins status as a mate and his lack of qualifications. "

 

[Pez5480]

I am no solicitor but if they are signing in your name without you inspecting then it is fraud.

You definitely have to raise this with them and keep your own trail of correspondence just in case. That means something like your own email account (not a company one that can be deleted "by accident").

Having someone else do the work and a qualified person check and verify testing is fine, but forging your approval is very VERY dodgy.

Thank you, didn’t think about using my personal!!

Yes would be happy to go back to the property even tho it’s 5 hours away and test the place then pass it if correct

 

[sunray]

How good is this 4th year apprentice? I’ve known some that still couldn’t work out simple 2 way lighting.

Sadly I've know far too many qualified and respected sparks who struggle with this if it isn't exactly as the standard.

 

[sunray]

Yeah it’s not very fail safe as anyone can fill out the certs

As for the 4th year, I got a phone call while they was working on this job saying him and the plumbers are getting electric shocks from everything they touch, told them to check the houses earthing a bonding and they found the bonding was disconnected, apparently this fixed the issue

So you have made over the phone dignostics and that allowed the apprentice to fix the fault and this written trail comfirms you took responsibility for him/her for that repair?

 

[LukeD]

Sadly I would refer to the fatal accident inquiry that was reported on the IET forum a while back. Here are a copy of the details and why you need to be careful:

"The case relates to the Death of 22 year old Emma Shaw who was the occupant with her 18 child month of a rented 1st floor flat in West Bromwich in December 2007.

The flat was one of new 42 flats that had electrical installation carried out by Anchor Building and Electrical services an NICEIC Approved Contractor in 2006.

The internal walls were constructed of "C" section metal studwork covered with plasterboard. A hall cupboard contained a pressurised water boiler above which was mounted a consumer unit supplied from a distribution circuit from a switch fuse in a an riser cupboard external to the flat. The means of earthing was TN-C-S. None of the circuits in the consumer unit were RCD protected. Circuit No. 3 supplied one of the immersion heaters in the boiler.

The electrical installation had been 1st fixed the plaster board fitted to the metal studding before the installation was 2nd fixed. Circuit 3 supplied a 20A double pole switch at high level which supplied a cable outlet at low level, this in turn supplied the water heater in flex.

The cable to the flex outlet was longer than it should be and when the plasterboard was installed the cable was trapped between the plasterboard and the stud-work. In addition a plasterboard screw passed through the cable clipping the Line and CPC conductors and in to the studwork.

The installation had been energised without any testing and the fault current had blown away part of the screw and CPC. This was verified by forensic examination at the HSE laboratories. This left a high resistance fault from the line conductor to the metal studwork.

18 months later the stat. on the water heater failed and the cylinder over pressurised and the safety valve operated and the safety valve operated and discharged in to a tun dish. The plastic waste pipe from the tun dish had parted because it was not glued and the water spilled on to the floor soaking the carpet. The water soaked under the foot of the wall and in to contact with the live studwork.

Miss Shaw was mopping up the water and had texted her partner to come home telling him the hall was flooded and the "electricity was sparking". he partner texted back to say to turn off the water stop cock sited in the same cupboard as the boiler.

Later she was found kneeling in the cupboard slumped forward and apparently lifeless. Subsequent examination and a Post Mortum determined that she was kneeling in the charged water and received a fatal shock when she touched the earthed stop valve.

West Midlands Police, the ambulance service and the fire service attended the scene. The police commenced an investigation for a suspicious death.

The police later arrested both the QS Hoult and Tomkins the electricians mate and they were interviewed under caution. Tomkins had signed an Electrical Installation Certificate as the Inspector. He admitted he was not qualified or competent to do so. He said he had been taken to the flat by the electrical site foreman and told to do ring continuity and loop impedance testing.He said when he got to the flat the installation was already energised. He did no other inspection and testing. He said that in the site hut they had sat around the table with the site foreman and was told the other tests had been done and he was told what to write on the test certificate.

This EIC was submitted to Anchors offices where a type written certificate was produced. The type written version had differences to Tomkins hand written version. The typed version had "P/P C Tomkins" in the single signature box for design. construction and inspection. Tomkins said in court he had not seen the typed form and he would not have consented to his signature being used. Mr Hoult the QS said that he just checked the figures on the form and signed it as the QS. he did not go to site and was not involved in the testing and inspection. Mr Hoult had known Tomkins for many years and it was alleged he knew about Tomkins status as a mate and his lack of qualifications. "

Why did he not tell her to turn off the C/B first ????

 

[Pez5480]

So you have made over the phone dignostics and that allowed the apprentice to fix the fault and this written trail comfirms you took responsibility for him/her for that repair?

They couldn’t understand why they was getting electric shocks from “everything they touched” I simply asked the question of have you looked at the property’s earthing. The answer was no and I never heard from them after this point, spoke to the a few days later and got told bonding was missing they connected it and fixed it apparently. And now the jobs signed off in my name and I’ve never been there or checked it.

 

[Markyd]

I would go feckin mental at them

 

[Pez5480]

I would go feckin mental at them

I’m not best pleased, gunna give them a chance to remove the certificate or let me go test the property myself or I’m guessing I will have to get the niceic involved

 

[nicebutdim]

Sadly I've know far too many qualified and respected sparks who struggle with this if it isn't exactly as the standard.

One of the best sparks I've ever met can only conceive of 2 way switching wired in a particular manner.

 

[Dustydazzler]

Doesn't seem right to me that they are signing your name on a job cert that A you never completed and B you never even worked on the job site

Can you imagine if 6 months down the line someone got a shock and died at the job and the paper trail leads back to the signature on the the cert and you end up in jail for a job you never even did

 

[Pez5480]

Doesn't seem right to me that they are signing your name on a job cert that A you never completed and B you never even worked on the job site

Can you imagine if 6 months down the line someone got a shock and died at the job and the paper trail leads back to the signature on the the cert and you end up in jail for a job you never even did

This is what I’m worried about. I’ve got a paper trail now of this issue to my boss so if anything happens between now and it getting sorted I have proof of me raising this issue. I have also found 2 other jobs signed off in my name!!

 

[mart spark]

Yeah it’s not very fail safe as anyone can fill out the certs

As for the 4th year, I got a phone call while they was working on this job saying him and the plumbers are getting electric shocks from everything they touch, told them to check the houses earthing a bonding and they found the bonding was disconnected, apparently this fixed the issue

Yeah it’s not very fail safe as anyone can fill out the certs

As for the 4th year, I got a phone call while they was working on this job saying him and the plumbers are getting electric shocks from everything they touch, told them to check the houses earthing a bonding and they found the bonding was disconnected, apparently this fixed the issue

This doesn't sound right to me. Just becsuse the bonding was missing doesn't mean that they should necessarily be receiving electric shocks. Reconnecting the bonding and not diagnosing the reason why the shocks were happening could just be masking it.

 

[Dustydazzler]

This doesn't sound right to me. Just becsuse the bonding was missing doesn't mean that they should necessarily be receiving electric shocks. Reconnecting the bonding and not diagnosing the reason why the shocks were happening could just be masking it.

With or without bonding they shouldn't be getting shocks on the pipes, certainly need FI

 

[Pez5480]

This doesn't sound right to me. Just becsuse the bonding was missing doesn't mean that they should necessarily be receiving electric shocks. Reconnecting the bonding and not diagnosing the reason why the shocks were happening could just be masking it.

No doesn’t sound correct to me either and the fact that someone has disconnected the bonding sounds like maybe someone already tried fixing it but not found the issue. But as I was never put on this job I cant actually get to the bottom of this but the worse part is that it’s now signed in my name and the property might still have a fault.

 

[Pez5480]

With or without bonding they shouldn't be getting shocks on the pipes, certainly need FI

I agree and I’m not actually sure that even fixed the issue, but he found it disconnected and then just connected it back up. Personally the fact it was disconnected in the first place would have been a red flag and would need investigating why they would have disconnected it. But sadly now that job is signed off in my name with out me looking at at and the fault possibly still on the system.

 

[littlespark]

Can you in any way access the test sheets lodged from your company through NIC if that’s your CPS?
Find out how many, and then can you …. Well, I wouldn’t like to suggest deleting them…. But flag them somehow?

What about the software for producing or uploading the certs? Is there a user name and password that you can change so only you can access?

 

[Pez5480]

Can you in any way access the test sheets lodged from your company through NIC if that’s your CPS?
Find out how many, and then can you …. Well, I wouldn’t like to suggest deleting them…. But flag them somehow?

What about the software for producing or uploading the certs? Is there a user name and password that you can change so only you can access?

Only the recent ones accessible on the software, that’s how I found out they was doing it. Older ones can’t seem to find. But I have found copies of them on our data base so I know it’s more than one. Deleting them won’t remove them from the niceic which is what I need to sort out I guessing as I’m the last person there on paper

 

[LukeD]

I knew someone who had issues with the taxman.. A client turned a simple quote into a "full house set" and the taxman wanted to know where the money from the job was . All he did was provide the Quote .It took a lot of effort to prove fraud against him. Good luck , But create a paper trail. NOTHING should be done via phone etc

 

[Pez5480]

I knew someone who had issues with the taxman.. A client turned a simple quote into a "full house set" and the taxman wanted to know where the money from the job was . All he did was provide the Quote .It took a lot of effort to prove fraud against him. Good luck , But create a paper trail. NOTHING should be done via phone etc

I’m employed and the company name is on top of the certificate so shouldn’t get complicated with the taxman, I hope not anyway. Yeah got a paper trail from my personal email now.
Going to talk to the niceic later and see what they say about it

 

[littlespark]

You are the only tester? Which means only you carry a test kit?

So is there jobs they’re not testing at all? Or just making up values and using your signature which is saved on the software?

How badly do you need this job? Because I can see this causing a bit of a rift.

The NICEIC may not do anything other than telling the company that test sheets x,y,z etc are not valid and need resubmitted… which they’ll do without telling you again, and as far as NIC is concerned, all fine.

Saying that, is there a member on here that is registered with NICEIC and can ask them hypothetically what should happen in this case?

The company needs to send you on every job that’s been fraudulently tested and get you to do it again… however you may never know how many over and above what they might say need doing.
I don’t know if NIC would divulge that information. Ie “give me a list of all test sheets with my signature from this company”

Taking the legal route, and taking it as far as you want to go is really going to cause friction…
Losing your job, and then claiming unfair dismissal on top. Your name could still be being used without your knowledge.

NIC should be your first port of call, but unless you need this job desperately, I’d consult a solicitor.

You will need a strong mental attitude to take it as far as this. It might ruin the company.

 

[Pez5480]

You are the only tester? Which means only you carry a test kit?

So is there jobs they’re not testing at all? Or just making up values and using your signature which is saved on the software?

How badly do you need this job? Because I can see this causing a bit of a rift.

The NICEIC may not do anything other than telling the company that test sheets x,y,z etc are not valid and need resubmitted… which they’ll do without telling you again, and as far as NIC is concerned, all fine.

Saying that, is there a member on here that is registered with NICEIC and can ask them hypothetically what should happen in this case?

The company needs to send you on every job that’s been fraudulently tested and get you to do it again… however you may never know how many over and above what they might say need doing.
I don’t know if NIC would divulge that information. Ie “give me a list of all test sheets with my signature from this company”

Taking the legal route, and taking it as far as you want to go is really going to cause friction…
Losing your job, and then claiming unfair dismissal on top. Your name could still be being used without your knowledge.

NIC should be your first port of call, but unless you need this job desperately, I’d consult a solicitor.

You will need a strong mental attitude to take it as far as this. It might ruin the company.

I am the only person in the company that is allowed to test and inspect. But the apprentice and “operations manager” have a tester that they share for some reason. I only found this out when the job in question was being done and I asked how are they going to test it knowing full well my tester was at home.

Sadly yes my signature is saved on the software.

I can definitely see this causing drama but I value my qualifications and future a lot more than this job! And I would hate for someone to possibly get hurt from dodgy wiring.

I’m going to try and contract the niceic today and see what they say and also ask if they can tell me all the documents that are in my name, hopefully they can do this.

I have a meeting with the boss tomorrow about it all so will see what they say about it and if they will do what I asked and send me on every single job that’s been signed in my name to retest or I’m gunna have to look into the legal route just so I can cover my ---.

 

[LukeD]

If you feel it need to go legal.... Jo Keddie - Winckworth Sherwood LLP - https://wslaw.co.uk/our-people/jo-keddie/#:~:text=Jo%20is%20the%20Firm's%20Senior,UK%20businesses%2C%20partnerships%20and%20individuals.

 

[Froggie]

There are legal protections in place for situations like this. See Whistleblowing for employees - https://www.gov.uk/whistleblowing

 

[timhoward]

I can't speak for NICEIC, but if it is similar to NAPIT, all NICEIC are doing is providing a means of generating pretty branded certificates and in one sense they don't have any interest in how you use this tool, you could equally be using a variety of tools e.g. electraform or easycert etc.

I suspect the only interest NICEIC will have is:
a) any certificates you show them on an assessment
b) if any jobs have been notified to LABC in your name without you even knowing about it
c) if your membership credentials are being used by others; there could be clauses about this in your terms and conditions and they may even deem you to be the one at fault for 'allowing it to happen', as harsh as that seems.

Who pays for the NICEIC membership, you, or the company? Is the company the NICEIC member with you as the QS, or are you employed as a qualified sparks who is an NICEIC member?

 

[Pez5480]

I can't speak for NICEIC, but if it is similar to NAPIT, all NICEIC are doing is providing a means of generating pretty branded certificates and in one sense they don't have any interest in how you use this tool, you could equally be using a variety of tools e.g. electraform or easycert etc.

I suspect the only interest NICEIC will have is:
a) any certificates you show them on an assessment
b) if any jobs have been notified to LABC in your name without you even knowing about it
c) if your membership credentials are being used by others; there could be clauses about this in your terms and conditions and they may even deem you to be the one at fault for 'allowing it to happen', as harsh as that seems.

Who pays for the NICEIC membership, you, or the company? Is the company the NICEIC member with you as the QS, or are you employed as a qualified sparks who is an NICEIC member?

The company pays for membership, and the company is niceic member with me as their qualified spark but I’ve just spoken to the niceic and they said I’m not on the software for the company as anything. I think the non qualified project manager has set him self as the QS and my signature has just been put on the software to go on the sheets

 

[timhoward]

The company pays for membership, and the company is niceic member with me as their qualified spark but I’ve just spoken to the niceic and they said I’m not on the software for the company as anything. I think the non qualified project manager has set him self as the QS and my signature has just been put on the software to go on the sheets

So from NICEIC's point of view, the company is doing the work and the person they have listed as 'qualified supervisor' is taking responsibility for the accuracy of records, and will be the one they contact for annual assessments etc.
This could get quite comical, the QS gets asked for 3 jobs to assess, they choose one, he asks the sparks who 'signed the cert' to come and prove test results and you say 'I've never been there in my live guv' in front of the assessor.
The company are setting themselves up for a fall here.

Your work records can probably prove you have been nowhere near most of these installations, and I'd put a letter in writing stating that you've become aware of certificates carrying your name fraudulently. List the cert numbers you've found.

A completely separate matter is whether the QS should be a QS, but that might be a different tiger to poke a different day.

 

[LukeD]

I can't speak for NICEIC, but if it is similar to NAPIT, all NICEIC are doing is providing a means of generating pretty branded certificates and in one sense they don't have any interest in how you use this tool, you could equally be using a variety of tools e.g. electraform or easycert etc.

I suspect the only interest NICEIC will have is:
a) any certificates you show them on an assessment
b) if any jobs have been notified to LABC in your name without you even knowing about it
c) if your membership credentials are being used by others; there could be clauses about this in your terms and conditions and they may even deem you to be the one at fault for 'allowing it to happen', as harsh as that seems.

Who pays for the NICEIC membership, you, or the company? Is the company the NICEIC member with you as the QS, or are you employed as a qualified sparks who is an NICEIC member?

So from NICEIC's point of view, the company is doing the work and the person they have listed as 'qualified supervisor' is taking responsibility for the accuracy of records, and will be the one they contact for annual assessments etc.
This could get quite comical, the QS gets asked for 3 jobs to assess, they choose one, he asks the sparks who 'signed the cert' to come and prove test results and you say 'I've never been there in my live guv' in front of the assessor.
The company are setting themselves up for a fall here.

Your work records can probably prove you have been nowhere near most of these installations, and I'd put a letter in writing stating that you've become aware of certificates carrying your name fraudulently. List the cert numbers you've found.

A completely separate matter is whether the QS should be a QS, but that might be a different tiger to poke a different day.

Very dodgy situation . I would want a very urgent meeting and to get the boss to establish /acknowledge whats taken place .To have that witnessed/signed and then establish whats going to happen as of TODAY in regards to any other certs been issued . I would not want to be around if things did get bad and you are been "torn apart" by the system. If you are unhappy , Follow whatever HR etc guidelines say and have meetings witnessed .

 

[Midwest]

I guess this sort of situation happens across the country with larger firms, and them not wanting to employ x amount of QS's. Difference is, is if your aware of the situation or not. In OP's case, would not of been happy to rely on this other persons testing, and would not sign off testing. I've had to drag test certificates out of electrical contractors doing work at my place of employment. I have some doubts whether any actual testing has been done.

As already said, if your employer doesn't agree to comply terms & conditions, which BS7671 model forms, and online software allude to, it would need the OP to consider his employment with this company.

 

[Spoon]

I have a meeting with the boss tomorrow about it all so will see what they say about it and if they will do what I asked and send me on every single job that’s been signed in my name to retest or I’m gunna have to look into the legal route just so I can cover my ---.

Make notes of the conversation while in the meeting. After the meeting send an email out to whoever attended the meeting, with what has been discussed. C.Y.A. (or record the meeting on your phone)

 

[Pez5480]

Make notes of the conversation while in the meeting. After the meeting send an email out to whoever attended the meeting, with what has been discussed. C.Y.A. (or record the meeting on your phone)

Yeah I was thinking about recording the meeting on my phone

 

[LukeD]

Yeah I was thinking about recording the meeting on my phone

That would need permission from all involved

 

[Eddy Currents]

That would need permission from all involved

I'm happy to be corrected but a normal person is not subject to GDPR rules unlike a business or organisation and it is not illegal to record a conversation
Sharing that recorded conversation is a different matter and could open up a civil claim for violation of privacy

If it were me, I would 100% record the conversation to cover my a**e and wouldn't think twice about it

 

[Sparky Ninja]

On behalf of the client, there is also the 'The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008' to think about.

 

[LukeD]

I'm happy to be corrected but a normal person is not subject to GDPR rules unlike a business or organisation and it is not illegal to record a conversation
Sharing that recorded conversation is a different matter and could open up a civil claim for violation of privacy

If it were me, I would 100% record the conversation to cover my a**e and wouldn't think twice about it

Tricky ..... IT would be better to say you wish to record . As Some contracts might have a clause about "recording meetings secretly etc ) Also it forms a professional atmosphere as each party is aware that what ever they say can be referred to later . Its also possible sometimes for a person to claim entrapment . Also ... if the OP was informed at the beginning of any meeting that any covert recording is not to take place etc .It could form "Gross misconduct" ?? A meeting can be "witnessed " At this stage , I would not want to lose a fight over something small. They might also be very worried if they are in the wrong and if so might use a very good employment lawyer to somehow "get you " on a technicality .

 

[LukeD]

Quick read : Can Employees record disciplinary meetings in the UK? - https://www.crane-staples.co.uk/news/can-employees-record-disciplinary-meetings/#:~:text=In%20employment%20matters%2C%20employees%20and,the%20employment%20tribunal%20or%20court).

 

[LukeD]

Audio Recordings Law - Can employees record our conversations?

During a formal meeting with an employee, what if you suspect every word is being secretly recorded? Read more about Audio Recordings Law.

www.stephens-scown.co.uk

If they can show its against their contract rules etc . Then it could mean trouble .


If you had DIRECT access to ask someone who charges £1200 a hour for the best advice on the matter . Their answer "Might" be "CHECK and if its stated .Then dont ".

 

[Spoon]

With regards to my comment "or record the meeting on your phone", I was thinking of just putting the phone on the table, for all to see, and tell them that you are recording the meeting, rather than doing notes, and then tell them that you will emailing it to all that has attended the meeting.

edit. If they don't want it recorded then just makes notes in the meeting and email them.

 

[Pez5480]

Audio Recordings Law - Can employees record our conversations?

During a formal meeting with an employee, what if you suspect every word is being secretly recorded? Read more about Audio Recordings Law.

www.stephens-scown.co.uk

If they can show its against their contract rules etc . Then it could mean trouble .


If you had DIRECT access to ask someone who charges £1200 a hour for the best advice on the matter . Their answer "Might" be "CHECK and if its stated .Then dont ".

Feel like this could get my self in more trouble than it’s worth and at the end of the day I’m doing this to protect myself from a situation I’ve been put in.
Personally I feel like I should go into the meeting while recording ask permission straight away before anything is said and if the request is denied I will have to refuse the meeting with out a recording or a neutral witness if it’s still denied walk back out.
And refusing for a witness or a recording will show they are trying to hide something

 

[timhoward]

Personally I'd go in with an open mind that boss may not be aware of what his blue-eyed QS has been up to, and at the first meeting I'd avoid doing anything to come across as antagonistic or a PITA. In other words, give him one chance.

It's a serious matter that should be taken seriously by default, and any half reasonable boss would completely understand that you are concerned the paperwork is fraudulently saying you have tested things that you haven't. If it were my company I'd be very concerned that this is a court case waiting to happen.

If nothing meaningful happens or changes you can send the company a letter, recorded delivery, stating that you are aware of many certificates that bear your name that you haven't tested, that these and any other similar jobs need testing properly, and you cannot take any responsibility for any certificates that bear your name until a full audit has been carried out. (and look for another job)

One other thought - do these certificates have an "approved for issue" or "reviewed by" section or similar and does the QS sign them too?

 

[Pez5480]

Personally I'd go in with an open mind that boss may not be aware of what his blue-eyed QS has been up to, and at the first meeting I'd avoid doing anything to come across as antagonistic or a PITA. In other words, give him one chance.

It's a serious matter that should be taken seriously by default, and any half reasonable boss would completely understand that you are concerned the paperwork is fraudulently saying you have tested things that you haven't. If it were my company I'd be very concerned that this is a court case waiting to happen.

If nothing meaningful happens or changes you can send the company a letter, recorded delivery, stating that you are aware of many certificates that bear your name that you haven't tested, that these and any other similar jobs need testing properly, and you cannot take any responsibility for any certificates that bear your name until a full audit has been carried out. (and look for another job)

One other thought - do these certificates have an "approved for issue" or "reviewed by" section or similar and does the QS sign them too?

Thanks for your help Tim
Apparently they get reviewed.
Basically if you fill every box and signature you can press finish and then after that you can press complete then the certificate locks its self.

Apparently the certificate that’s in question has been reviewed and passed by their supervisor.
The supervisor works for a different company and owns 25% of the company I work for.

After speaking to the niceic today I’m not on the software login at all, my name doesn’t come up which obviously made this very difficult when trying to ask questions.

I was all up for going into the meeting open minded hope this can be smoothed over but after asking for a meeting about this issue the project manager replied to me saying it was a clerical error and that the certificate will be removed and then went on to saying that I shouldn’t leave my signature on the software.
Made me feel like they was going to lie through their teeth as a clerical error doesn’t normally happen multiple times, I raised this issue in a follow up email and got no reply for some reason