Self policing EICR cowboys

[richardg]

I have picked up 2 contracts in the last week to fix remedial work reported on a EICR.

After an initial discussion with the landlords I requested a copy of the EICR to see what had been reported.

In both cases the reports looked wrong, with tests missing and generally no added detail.
After reading the reports I spoke to the tenants and both of them stated the ‘electrician’ was in the property for around 30mins. My standard testing time is 4-8 hours depending on the condition.

After visiting the properties I was literally ‘shocked’ at the sheer incompetence shown. Both properties had sockets with reversed polarity - meaning no R1+R2 reading were possible(he hadn’t removed any sockets covers),I found there was no earthing to lighting circuits - guess what - there was a R1+R2 readings.

At what point do we report these companies - who do we report them to? are they even using licensed electricians?

I’m speaking to the letting agents tomorrow and feel so ********* I’m going to call this ‘family business’ and professional give them what’s for.

Any advice in next steps?

 

[Baddegg]

Letting agents won’t care as they are getting a cut of the profit....scheme won’t care either as again it’s income for them and reports are at the testers discretion...all we can do is do our job properly and wait till the shtf ?

 

[Dustydazzler]

I wouldn't lose any sleep over a bodged EICR , we all know there are dozens of these 15 min drive-by reports going on every single day.
Until we have one safety register which actually holds its members to account then the race will always be to the bottom and these money grabbing scams will do nothing but cash cheques without any questions asked

 

[polaroid]

I'd report it to all involved and the scheme. Makes you look professional and like you give a ----. Not all agents are not going to care, some will have a conscience and maybe give you more work - you'll probably be able to tell if they care the first time you mention it. Also if nothing gets reported to schemes then they're not going to know there is a problem should they want to address it. If someone dies from a install with a shoddy EICR than turned out to be fudged by someone who had been reported serveral times for that exact thing... I'd like to think an investigation would pick it up.

Yes it is demoralising and easy just to ignore it but I know I'd be doing my bit... things have a better chance of improving if people change their attitudes to this.

I'm not qualified yet but that's just my two cents...

 

[Teddy Lop]

Seen loads of it, schedules that don't even marry up with the CU etc etc

Then the scheme guy who audits me seems utterly ---- retentive and picks me up on the stupidest things. Seems to be two completely different worlds.

Mind, I'm not sure scheme membership is even a reqiurement for these rental EICRs, I'm sure some letting agents and landlords would print their own if someone told them how.

 

[richardg]

I'd report it to all involved and the scheme. Makes you look professional and like you give a ----. Not all agents are not going to care, some will have a conscience and maybe give you more work - you'll probably be able to tell if they care the first time you mention it. Also if nothing gets reported to schemes then they're not going to know there is a problem should they want to address it. If someone dies from a install with a shoddy EICR than turned out to be fudged by someone who had been reported serveral times for that exact thing... I'd like to think an investigation would pick it up.

Yes it is demoralising and easy just to ignore it but I know I'd be doing my bit... things have a better chance of improving if people change their attitudes to this.

I'm not qualified yet but that's just my two cents...

Over the years I’ve seen many bad EICR - just seems like it’s becoming more prevalent recently and true cowboys are moving into the space. When you finally get your qualifications you need to shell out for Public Liability and professional indemnity insurance for testing on top of the mega fees Napit charge.
It’s not a cheap business following the regs but at least ‘you know’ you have done it right.
Will let you know how the chat goes tomorrow

 

[Soi disant]

Report it to the council. Inform them that the landlord is in contravention of 3 (1) (a) and (b) of The Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020.

(b) in that he has not had the electrical installation inspected and tested by a qualified person, and
(a) because as a result of (b) there are problems where the electrical safety standards are not met but which have not been found.

 

[richardg]

Report it to the council. Inform them that the landlord is in contravention of 3 (1) (a) and (b) of The Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020.

(b) in that he has not had the electrical installation inspected and tested by a qualified person, and
(a) because as a result of (b) there are problems where the electrical safety standards are not met but which have not been found.

To be fair the landlord arranged this through his agents who hired a company to attend. He was quoted for the ‘repairs’ and even as a non electrican smelt something fishy.
He contacted me after looking for somebody who was qualified and insured and able to give him an honest assessment.

 

[Soi disant]

Is he going to give his agents a roasting for engaging someone incompetent and putting him at risk of being in breach of the law?

 

[Zerax]

Until we have one safety register which actually holds its members to account then the race will always be to the bottom and these money grabbing scams will do nothing but cash cheques without any questions asked

That kinda happens with Gas already... but again, there's no holding to account for poor/shoddy work. If anything goes seriously wrong, it's the HSE that use the stick to beat them with.

 

[Dartlec]

It is partially self selecting because the only ones that come to us for second opinions are already either obviously dodgy or involve high quotes, but every EICR I've had reason to see of late has had significant errors or inconsistencies that are clear just from looking at the form, without even bothering to see a photo or go to site.

Things like ticks in boxes that contradict observations, or readings on the test sheet that are clearly not real - and that's before finding that the schedule of test results doesn't even fit what is written on the CU, let alone what is actually the case when you trace circuits.

It's akin to the dodgy MOT ticket that (I perhaps wrongly) think has been made more difficult by the centralisation of their systems.

Not sure how it could work, but if there was a central body auditing these certificates a lot of them would fail purely on a 5 minute visual check over with no need for site visits. I suspect we've all seen a certificate that doesn't pass the 'sniff test'.

The problem is of course that there is apparently never any comeback - Time and cost pressure will always drive a market for the drive by scam artists - but the most recent EICRs I've had to basically explain to a landlord were not worth the paper they were written on were from an NICEIC approved contract and a NAPIT registered tester...

No doubt the 2 or 3 chosen certificates at inspection time will be the ones they know have been done properly.

I wouldn't be surprised if there is a 'scandal' in a few years when the number of quickly and poorly fitted CUs this time round either all fail the next inspection, or there is a serious injury or tragedy and someone finally traces back the paperwork.

The Ltd companies making their money at the moment will no doubt be long gone by then though...

 

[Dustydazzler]

trying to pin an electrical injury or poorly installed work several years after the event is very difficult even if you managed to find the original contractor. They could quite easily claim it wasn’t like that when they left it and say others have subsequently modified the installation.
this is why Eicrs should be much for frequent than every 5-10 years.
if an eicr was done every 2 years it would be much easier to track the paper trail and hold to account bogus reports , shoddy work and any potential injuries resulting in Z work

 

[cliffed]

I have picked up 2 contracts in the last week to fix remedial work reported on a EICR.

After an initial discussion with the landlords I requested a copy of the EICR to see what had been reported.

In both cases the reports looked wrong, with tests missing and generally no added detail.
After reading the reports I spoke to the tenants and both of them stated the ‘electrician’ was in the property for around 30mins. My standard testing time is 4-8 hours depending on the condition.

After visiting the properties I was literally ‘shocked’ at the sheer incompetence shown. Both properties had sockets with reversed polarity - meaning no R1+R2 reading were possible(he hadn’t removed any sockets covers),I found there was no earthing to lighting circuits - guess what - there was a R1+R2 readings.

At what point do we report these companies - who do we report them to? are they even using licensed electricians?

I’m speaking to the letting agents tomorrow and feel so ********* I’m going to call this ‘family business’ and professional give them what’s for.

Any advice in next steps?

 

[Dartlec]

Where is that answer from out of interest? I'd read it as saying that R1+R2 may not be needed if Zs has been taken for each circuit - as that checks polarity and is possible even when circuits cannot be isolated. It is also the defining limit on whether the OPCD is satisfactory.

It's correct that you can calculate Zs, but not the reverse.

Mind you, even the cheapest plug in socket tester should have picked up reverse polarity (assuming L-N switch).

 

[cliffed]

Where is that answer from out of interest? I'd read it as saying that R1+R2 may not be needed if Zs has been taken for each circuit - as that checks polarity and is possible even when circuits cannot be isolated. It is also the defining limit on whether the OPCD is satisfactory.

It's correct that you can calculate Zs, but not the reverse.

Mind you, even the cheapest plug in socket tester should have picked up reverse polarity (assuming L-N switch).

It’s from the Niceic site.

 

[richardg]

Where is that answer from out of interest? I'd read it as saying that R1+R2 may not be needed if Zs has been taken for each circuit - as that checks polarity and is possible even when circuits cannot be isolated. It is also the defining limit on whether the OPCD is satisfactory.

It's correct that you can calculate Zs, but not the reverse.

Mind you, even the cheapest plug in socket tester should have picked up reverse polarity (assuming L-N switch).

The tenant said he spent virtually no time looking around, no excuse not to plug your mft into sockets and check, there were only 12 sockets in the flat.
Pure cowboy behaviour!

 

[mattg4321]

Write to your MP. Or whatever commons select committee is responsible for electrical work.

Maybe we could all sign it.

A letter with hundreds of electrical companies signatures on to the correct commons select committee might raise some eyebrows

 

[UNG]

Write to your MP. Or whatever commons select committee is responsible for electrical work.

Maybe we could all sign it.

A letter with hundreds of electrical companies signatures on to the correct commons select committee might raise some eyebrows

It might be a better idea to go direct to the minister at the MHCLG, the NICEIC under the guidance of Clancy went direct to the minister last time to circumvent the select committee report when it was going against the NICEIC

I do wonder how the NICEIC would react if they got a letter regarding the standard of EICR's that some their members are producing and making it clear that it was also copied to UKAS

 

[i=p/u]

If you ain't happy with your scheme certified installer/ electricians work/report, you can report it. All your going to create is more fees to be a spark. 450 +vat for regs course.

 

[Zerax]

I do wonder how the NICEIC would react if they got a letter regarding the standard of EICR's that some their members are producing and making it clear that it was also copied to UKAS

I could write the letter of reply now... "We take the standard of work of our members very seriously... blah blah blah", "All our members are vetted before admittance and annually... blah blah blah", "We encourage all our members to undertake CPD to... blah blah blah", "We will of course look into any reported shortcomings... blah blah blah"

Imagine a large carpet... with a big bulge in it... that's where all this would end up...

...not that I'm cynical at all.