Eicr rented

[Paulpaul]

Sorry if this has been done before
Change of occupier on rented property
Gn3 good or ignore.

 

[buzzlightyear]

Me for testing rented property I would put 3 years. But up to the tester inspector.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

Sorry if this has been done before
Change of occupier on rented property
Gn3 good or ignore.

Change of occupier is over the top IMO. 5 years for me on rentals

 

[telectrix]

not a full EICR, but a quick inspection on change of tenant is my approach. spots any damage done by the tenant that's leaving, and also checks if meter has been bypassed.

 

[GBDamo]

Renting is a business, providing a product for money, and with that comes a responsibility to make sure that product is safe.

The best way to achieve that is to have an expert make that assessment and have a piece of paper that indemnifies you.

Things can happen between tenants that shouldn't, the business owner is responsible to ensure one tenant does not make the product unsafe or if they do that a safe state is restored before the next tenant moves in.

For this reason I cannot see how not doing and EICR between tenancies can be acceptable.

Others may disagree but its quite black and white to me.

As for frequency within a tenancy period that depends on the state of the installation. If its a new property with a solid installation then five years is fine. If its hanging on but the landlord refuses a rewire then a year could be applicable.

It's all in the expert opinion of the professional carrying out the EICR.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

Renting is a business, providing a product for money, and with that comes a responsibility to make sure that product is safe.

The best way to achieve that is to have an expert make that assessment and have a piece of paper that indemnifies you.

Things can happen between tenants that shouldn't, the business owner is responsible to ensure one tenant does not make the product unsafe or if they do that a safe state is restored before the next tenant moves in.

For this reason I cannot see how not doing and EICR between tenancies can be acceptable.

Others may disagree but its quite black and white to me.

As for frequency within a tenancy period that depends on the state of the installation. If its a new property with a solid installation then five years is fine. If its hanging on but the landlord refuses a rewire then a year could be applicable.

It's all in the expert opinion of the professional carrying out the EICR.

I disagree. An EICR at change of tenancy is way over the top.

The legislation says max 5 years intervals. Nowhere does it, or the government guidance for it, suggest it is necessary to carry out an EICR between tenancies. It reasonable to assume that if the government wanted rentals to be inspected every time a tenancy ended, it would have stated so in the legislation.

The model EICR form asks you to provide a recommended date for the next EICR. Same for the sticker you put on the consumer unit, it asks for a date. 'Change of tenancy' is not a date, and so can be reasonably be ignored by the landlord.

If you force landlords to have EICRS on their properties potentially every 6 months, they will most likely refuse to take on short term tenants. Too much hassle and cost. Alternatively, the cost will be passed on to the tenant, making short term lets even more prohibitively expensive than they already are.

 

[loz2754]

I disagree. An EICR at change of tenancy is way over the top.

The legislation says max 5 years intervals. Nowhere does it, or the government guidance for it, suggest it is necessary to carry out an EICR between tenancies. It reasonable to assume that if the government wanted rentals to be inspected every time a tenancy ended, it would have stated so in the legislation.

The model EICR form asks you to provide a recommended date for the next EICR. Same for the sticker you put on the consumer unit, it asks for a date. 'Change of tenancy' is not a date, and so can be reasonably be ignored by the landlord.

If you force landlords to have EICRS on their properties potentially every 6 months, they will most likely refuse to take on short term tenants. Too much hassle and cost. Alternatively, the cost will be passed on to the tenant, making short term lets even more prohibitively expensive than they already are.

Wot he said...
The way I read the new regs and the government guidance on the new regs is that it would be not be desirable, nor in line with the spirit of the regs, to give a date of "X years, or change of tenancy".

 

[littlespark]

on the scottish side, we have this:

Private Landlords in Scotland | Electrical Safety First

Covid-19 Guidance The Scottish Government has issued guidance for private landlords and letting agents to support them during these pandemic. If an electrical

www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk

which states an EICR should be done "before a tenancy begins"

and also a (maximum) 5 year date during a tenancy. Could be sooner

 

[DPG]

Agree with the above, a full EICR every change of tennancy is over the top especially on 6 months contracts.

A visual check yes, and then maybe an EICR if anything is spotted.

 

[GBDamo]

Wot he said...
The way I read the new regs and the government guidance on the new regs is that it would be not be desirable, nor in line with the spirit of the regs, to give a date of "X years, or change of tenancy".

I disagree. An EICR at change of tenancy is way over the top.

The legislation says max 5 years intervals. Nowhere does it, or the government guidance for it, suggest it is necessary to carry out an EICR between tenancies. It reasonable to assume that if the government wanted rentals to be inspected every time a tenancy ended, it would have stated so in the legislation.

The model EICR form asks you to provide a recommended date for the next EICR. Same for the sticker you put on the consumer unit, it asks for a date. 'Change of tenancy' is not a date, and so can be reasonably be ignored by the landlord.

If you force landlords to have EICRS on their properties potentially every 6 months, they will most likely refuse to take on short term tenants. Too much hassle and cost. Alternatively, the cost will be passed on to the tenant, making short term lets even more prohibitively expensive than they already are.

I hear what your saying but how else do you, as a landlord, indemnify yourself from blame in the event of an electrical incident in your property?

 

[Pretty Mouth]

I hear what your saying but how else do you, as a landlord, indemnify yourself from blame in the event of an electrical incident in your property?

This would be something for the landlord to decide don't you think? If they themselves decide to have the property inspected more often than required, that should be up to them. But I don't see as we should force that onto them.

It is true that a tenant could meddle with the electrical installation at a property, however, I suspect this would be rare. I don't recall if my tenancy prohibits me from changing light fittings etc, but I do remember I have to ask permission to hang a picture, so I expect so. If a landlord does occasional visits to the property, as they should, they are likely to notice any modifications.

 

[UNG]

I disagree. An EICR at change of tenancy is way over the top.

The legislation says max 5 years intervals. Nowhere does it, or the government guidance for it, suggest it is necessary to carry out an EICR between tenancies. It reasonable to assume that if the government wanted rentals to be inspected every time a tenancy ended, it would have stated so in the legislation.

The model EICR form asks you to provide a recommended date for the next EICR. Same for the sticker you put on the consumer unit, it asks for a date. 'Change of tenancy' is not a date, and so can be reasonably be ignored by the landlord.

If you force landlords to have EICRS on their properties potentially every 6 months, they will most likely refuse to take on short term tenants. Too much hassle and cost. Alternatively, the cost will be passed on to the tenant, making short term lets even more prohibitively expensive than they already are.

I can understand your point to some extent but over a 5 year period the tenancy could change possibly 10 times or more so if an incident occurs beyond the first rental period involving the electrical installation that causes serious injury or death who is responsible and in the litigation firing line
Is the fact the legislation says 5 years a valid and adequate defence I would think not

 

[Pretty Mouth]

I can understand your point to some extent but over a 5 year period the tenancy could change possibly 10 times or more so if an incident occurs beyond the first rental period involving the electrical installation that causes serious injury or death who is responsible and in the litigation firing line
Is the fact the legislation says 5 years a valid and adequate defence I would think not

Do you think that it is reasonable to force a landlord to have 10 EICRs carried out on a rental property over a 5 year period? This is proper nanny state stuff don't you think? And will probably do more harm than good to the installation.

I'm all for electrical safety in the rental sector, but we have to be sensible in its application.

If a landlord has his 5 yearly EICR carried out, does regular property inspections, has any problems dealt with, and has no reason to believe that any unauthorised electrical work has been carried out at the property, then (s)he has done all that is reasonable to ensure the safety of his/her tenants.

 

[UNG]

Do you think that it is reasonable to force a landlord to have 10 EICRs carried out on a rental property over a 5 year period? This is proper nanny state stuff don't you think? And will probably do more harm than good to the installation.

I'm all for electrical safety in the rental sector, but we have to be sensible in its application.

If a landlord has his 5 yearly EICR carried out, does regular property inspections, has any problems dealt with, and has no reason to believe that any unauthorised electrical work has been carried out at the property, then (s)he has done all that is reasonable to ensure the safety of his/her tenants.

You are arguing from the point of a landlord but then seem concerned about the cost of private rents being increased because of cost of additional checks on a change of tenacy with your hidden profile I am finding it difficult to understand where you are coming from
While I can partly see your point you keep referring to the landlord doing a regular inspection, what about the absent landlord who relies on the letting agent, will the letting agent want to take the responsibility of doing the regular property inspections and confirming the electrical installation is safe for continued use
Then you start to encroach on the EAWR and competence, but ultimately it all comes down to a serious incident and litigation and that man in the wig to find out whether those involved have properly discharged their responsibilities and duty of care in the most appropriate manner

To throw another one in if it is a long term let of more than 5 years why should a landlord be expected to have an EICR at 5 years when 10 years is the recommended interval on a domestic property

 

[LukeD]

I know many rented properties in London who's landlords have yet to arrange EICR's . Nothing gets done about these landlords

 

[Pretty Mouth]

@UNG , should I infer from your lack of answer to my question that you do think that forcing a landlord to have 10 EICRs during a 5 year period is reasonable? And presumably these wouldn't be the £80 ones that you'd warned your landlord client off, these would the full £250 ones?

You are arguing from the point of a landlord but then seem concerned about the cost of private rents being increased because of cost of additional checks on a change of tenacy with your hidden profile I am finding it difficult to understand where you are coming from

I don't follow you here: what do you hope to learn from my profile? My rental status? Whether I'm a landlord or not? If it helps: I rent my home, from a landlord, via an agency.

While I can partly see your point you keep referring to the landlord doing a regular inspection, what about the absent landlord who relies on the letting agent, will the letting agent want to take the responsibility of doing the regular property inspections and confirming the electrical installation is safe for continued use

I believe landlords pay agents to do exactly this - ensure their property is well looked after by the tenant. In my case, a deposit was taken of 1.5 months rent, and an outside company compiled an inventory and report on the condition of the property, in tedious detail, with photos - this included electrical accessories. If I break something, it gets taken out of my deposit, and I'm not allowed to change anything. The agents have carried out 3 inspections in the 4 years I have been here, though not since covid.

Then you start to encroach on the EAWR and competence, but ultimately it all comes down to a serious incident and litigation and that man in the wig to find out whether those involved have properly discharged their responsibilities and duty of care in the most appropriate manner

I'm not an expert on law (as I assume most of us here aren't), so I'm not going to speculate on what might happen in court.

From a layperson's perspective, if a landlord carries out occasional inspections, and checks the place over at the end of the tenancy ((s)he will want to do this anyway, to ensure the tenant isn't trashing the place), it's hard to see what a tenant could do to the electrical installation that wouldn't get picked up on, unless it was deliberately very well hidden. Hard to blame the LL for that.

 

[littlespark]

Some landlords buy house hardly looking at them…. Trusting an agent to check it over for them….
Mr Tenant doesn’t like the white light switch, and changes it for a decorative metal… and makes a hash of it.
No one on a casual visual inspection notices.

fast forward, no eicr done. Change of tenancy.
In the meantime, dodgy wire drops out and is touching the metal switch. DIY Dave hadn’t connected the earth wire.

new tenants 5 year old kiddy gets a shock off the switch.

Exaggerated I know, but that’s the reason there are EICRs done.
No landlord can trust their tenant 100% not to fiddle with something.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

Some landlords buy house hardly looking at them…. Trusting an agent to check it over for them….
Mr Tenant doesn’t like the white light switch, and changes it for a decorative metal… and makes a hash of it.
No one on a casual visual inspection notices.

fast forward, no eicr done. Change of tenancy.
In the meantime, dodgy wire drops out and is touching the metal switch. DIY Dave hadn’t connected the earth wire.

new tenants 5 year old kiddy gets a shock off the switch.

Exaggerated I know, but that’s the reason there are EICRs done.
No landlord can trust their tenant 100% not to fiddle with something.

This situation is certainly possible, however would have been avoided by the agent simply doing his/her job properly. An inventory at the start of the tenancy, and checked out at the end would have identified the swap. The cheapest of the cheap EICR (the sort a landlord is likely to go for should (s)he be made to have them too often, and the likes of which we see all too often on these forums) would not necessarily have identified the fault.

 

[littlespark]

Yes. I know… extreme scenario.

I’m still arguing the Scottish side where my earlier link did state before tenancy, and 5 years during… which the tester them self could bring the next eicr quicker if they saw a problem that needed more frequent checking.

And we have 6 month short assured tennancys, so it could be 2x EICRs in one year.

Again, up to the tester how much of a test they perform… A newly built house, with previous test certs won’t take as long as a recent purchased older property with dubious history.

It’s down to landlords have to ensure the safety of their tenants. Not just electrically. They will have a gas safety test every year, and no one fiddles with the gas system… so why does it need checked??

All it takes is for a tenant to die, or a tower block to go up in flames and we will be doing EICRs on an annual basis

 

[UNG]

As the advert said "where there is blame there's a claim" and the madness of some litigation these days means that if someone can get money out of a claim they will try as the no win no fee lawyers mean it costs very little to do it