Does my Certificate of Compliance cover the whole house?

[Starkey444]

Hi, I’ve just had a new Consumer Unit installed and as part on the installation my electrician tested the integrity of the wiring in the whole house before fitting the fuse box.
I now have a Certificate of Compliance from Elecsa which describes the notifiable work as “Install a replacement consumer unit”.

Does this certificate imply the whole house has been certified as safe on the basis that all the circuitry had to be tested prior to fuse box installation? Or would I need some other certificate if I were to sell the house (it’s the first certificate I’ve had needed as no notifiable work has been done on the house for a few years)
Regards

 

[Deleted member 26818]

No.
The certificate of compliance just says the electrical work it relates to, complies with the Building Regulations.
You should also have been given a copy of the Electrical Installation Certificate from the Electrician.
Again this will only cover the work conducted, but may have comments relating to the condition of the rest of the installation.
If you want something that will say whether the installation is safe, or not. You need an Electrical Installation Condition Report.

 

[Gavin John Hyde]

The certificate covers the consumer unit and the circuits as far as can reasonably be tested. for example the electrician tests the circuits to ensure they will disconnect in the event of a fault. he or she hasn't said the cables which go under the floorboards in the walls are installed correctly and not bodged together with bits of tape.. so with any certificate there are limitations.

 

[Risteard]

As above, it relates only to the work specified within it, i.e. the replacement of the DB only. Although the existing installation needs to be verified in terms of ADS operating it does not and cannot certify installation work which was not carried out by the contractor and to which the certification does not relate.

 

[Midwest]

My opinion. Whilst I agree with the above, I would add the following.

In large domestic property, one with obvious issues I would not carrying out a consumer unit (CU) replacment with first the customer agreeing to an EICR being carried out. I would also not do the same if it was a distressed change (damaged to existing CU).

However for the OP's information, in a typical domestic property, I would carry out a CU replacment without an EICR, only after however conducting a pre-work survey. The survey would consist of a visual inspection, verification of correctly sized main earthing & bonding, specific design of new CU of RCD protection to prevent hazards & minimise inconvenience in the event of a fault, existing install is safe to install (i.e. circuits suitably sized, no lighting circuits without cpc etc), the supply head was suitable & in good condition, whether the owner knew of any existing faults and a series of tests to ensure the installation would be safe to re-energise etc, and not result in unwanted RCD tripping. Any remedial work needed, would have to be carried out prior to CU replacement.

This I suggest would be typical process of most electricians, carrying out a CU replacement without first conducting an EICR.

 

[45140]

BS 7671 states that " ..an EIC is used....(for)..the replacement of a consumer unit..."

 

[ipf]

My opinion. Whilst I agree with the above, I would add the following.

In large domestic property, one with obvious issues I would not carrying out a consumer unit (CU) replacment with first the customer agreeing to an EICR being carried out. I would also not do the same if it was a distressed change (damaged to existing CU).

However for the OP's information, in a typical domestic property, I would carry out a CU replacment without an EICR, only after however conducting a pre-work survey. The survey would consist of a visual inspection, verification of correctly sized main earthing & bonding, specific design of new CU of RCD protection to prevent hazards & minimise inconvenience in the event of a fault, existing install is safe to install (i.e. circuits suitably sized, no lighting circuits without cpc etc), the supply head was suitable & in good condition, whether the owner knew of any existing faults and a series of tests to ensure the installation would be safe to re-energise etc, and not result in unwanted RCD tripping. Any remedial work needed, would have to be carried out prior to CU replacement.

This I suggest would be typical process of most electricians, carrying out a CU replacement without first conducting an EICR.

I'm not saying I don't agree with you, it's a very good way of going about it......however, there is the argument, in certain cases, for upgrading to an rcd protected replacement cu.....after all, it is an improvement on the original.

 

[Toneyz]

This is a discussion that you should be having with the electrician/electrical contractor that you have employed.