Certificate signing

[robjcox]

Hi all.

My electrician is issuing me with certificates without a signature. The certs are completed via a computer then posted to me. In the signature fields are the names of the installer and QS printed but no signature as such, not evan a scanned one.

Is this acceptable?

 

[malcolmsanford]

Regulation 631.5 states that any certificate can be issued durable medium either written or electronic.

They must though be original and have their authenticity and integrity verified by a reliable process or method.

To be Honest I would have thought if it had the name of the company and it's representative on it, then they are authenticated as such.

Have you asked them a) why they don't actually sign them b)If you sent them or took them to their office and supplied a stamped address envelope, will they sign them for you

 

[JamesBrownLive]

Have you paid said electrician for the work he/she has done yet?

 

[SirKit Breaker]

They should be signed. You will either have been issued with a single signature certificate, where the electrician has done all of Design, Construction, and Testing and Inspection. He should have signed in one box to cover all 3. Alternatively, he may have issued you a cert requiring up to 3 signatures, if different people within the organisation who did the work for you only carried out a certain part of it. In both cases the Electrical Installation Certificate, should be accompanied by a Schedule of Test Results, and a Schedule of Inspections. Without both of these the certificate is not worth the paper it is written on. Have you contacted the company? It may just be an innocent oversight on their part.

Cheers...........Howard

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Without a signature, the Certificate is not worth the paper it's printed on.
Get in touch with the electrician, and tell them to sort it out.

 

[malcolmsanford]

So what your saying guys is that only a signature is classed as a reliable process or method.

A company stamp and the names of the representatives do not count ........fair enough I stand corrected

 

[UNG]

Having seen my fair share of dodgy and obviously fake certificates over the years

I wouldn't accept a certificate with a scanned signature or no signature as alarm bells start to ring that they may be fake and do the people whose names or scanned signatures appear on them know they are being represented in this way and accept that the information on them is correct and the liability that goes with it

 

[robjcox]

I have no doubt these cetificates are genuine. The company involved have recently switched to electronic certification which means the actual installation engineer may not be able to sign it between the data being entered onto a computer and the cert being issued.

My question is really whether or not it is a requirement to have an actual signature?? I have had experience of scanned signatures being used with EasyCert for example but these are coming back with just the name printed.

 

[WDMDL]

I use NAPIT Desktop and this prints my name in italics with "electronically created" underneath in the signature box.
The authenticity is ensured by the process and the ability to check authenticity with, in this case, NAPIT.

Have you seen the new style MOT Test certificates? No need for anything fancy these days as they can be checked against the central database

Simon.

 

[malcolmsanford]

So there are other means of reliable process or method, in authenticating a certificate other than a signature.

Guys this is the 21st Century, and we are always quick in denouncing the IET for being slow with things, but if they felt that the only way a certificate could be authenticated was by signature only, then they would have put that in reg 631.5.

In today's electronic world sometimes documents can not be signed and there are other ways do do it, hence why the regs comment on reliable process or method, such as Simon and I suggested.

First there was the wax seal, then the signature and now .........................computers.