EICR Repairs.

[Retroelectric]

Hi
If you go behind another electrician who has failed an EICR on something minor, like a couple of broken pendants or something, you carry out the repairs and issue a minor works, the client would then have an unsatisfactory EICR and a minor works cert stating that the C2 items have been rectified.
The original EICR has a 1 month till next inspection date so would these 2 documents together give a OK for 5 years outcome?

 

[Dartlec]

Hi
If you go behind another electrician who has failed an EICR on something minor, like a couple of broken pendants or something, you carry out the repairs and issue a minor works, the client would then have an unsatisfactory EICR and a minor works cert stating that the C2 items have been rectified.
The original EICR has a 1 month till next inspection date so would these 2 documents together give a OK for 5 years outcome?

The short answer is yes - the law does not require a 'satisfactory' report to be generated - just that any necessary remedial works (generally C2s) after an inspection is completed within 28 days and that this can be proved where necessary.

It may be sensible to note in the MWC the work specifically in a way that cross references with the certificate - maybe even quote the certificate number?

In practice if letting agents are involved, they tend not to see much past the front page though, so sometimes seem to be demanding a bit of paper with 'satisfactory' on.

 

[buzzlightyear]

Once it's been done has above the spark original will give a satisfactory,
And cost the customer new test cert..

 

[Retroelectric]

Just been asked to do the repairs on a couple of fails and test some other properties they have got.
If its just a broken socket or something minor like that once i have completed the test I normally just change them if its the difference between a pass and a fail and so far the clients don't seem to mind, I always take pictures of before and after still.
They have been quoted £90 to change 2 pendants that the blue and brown are showing outside the cap where its stretched over the years, seems quite a bit to me but not sure as they will also get a Satisfactory EICR, I can only issue a minor works to go with the unsatisfactory one but i know with letting agents they only look at page 1.

 

[i=p/u]

Once it's been done has above the spark original will give a satisfactory,
And cost the customer new test cert..

In your dreams.

 

[i=p/u]

Yes I didn't do remedial work but il come test electrics again and charge... to messy lol

 

[littlespark]

Blue and brown showing on a pendant.... is that dangerous or even potentially??? Just untidy.

improvement recommended. C3- satisfactory report.

 

[Retroelectric]

Yes I agree.
Think they are in the situation of if they want a satisfactory EICR they have to agree to the remedial price or get someone to retest, but then they might fail it on something else and they could be potentially be 2 EICR's down for an unsatisfactory certificate.
You could be in the situation of having to pay £100 to the tester for replacing a broken light switch or something as it would be cheaper than another EICR.

 

[Deleted account]

Hi
If you go behind another electrician who has failed an EICR on something minor, like a couple of broken pendants or something, you carry out the repairs and issue a minor works, the client would then have an unsatisfactory EICR and a minor works cert stating that the C2 items have been rectified.
The original EICR has a 1 month till next inspection date so would these 2 documents together give a OK for 5 years outcome?

Answer is actually no.

the next inspection date is 1 month you cannot change that.

however I think the person carrying out the EICR should have maybe given the full 5 years with unsatisfactory Unless he thought the Istallation was deterio4ating at a rate that it would only last 1 month.

the date originally given for a next date should be on the assumption that the remedial s are carried out Within a month. It states this on the report.

 

[telectrix]

could be that whoever done the EICR put 1 month for next test due instead of allowing 1 month for the repairs. what's the date of issue of the EICR?

 

[i=p/u]

1950

 

[timhoward]

I've wondered about this scenario before.
I've never done this but hypothetically and creatively is there anything to stop you doing another EICR certificate stating:
Purpose "Confirming that remedial works required by inspection on dd/mm/yyyy listed on certificate xxxxxx have been carried out"
Limitations "Limited to checking Supply characteristics, Earthing and Bonding arrangements, that loop tests correlate with previous certificate xxxxx, and remedial works are completed"
Then most items would be LIM unless they were previously coded in which case they'd be a tick. Stick 5 years on it. Satisfactory certificate. Everyone's happy except the customer who's paid for a little bit more time.
Main risk is if original inspector missed something but on other hand the limitation is fairly clear.
Thoughts welcome!

 

[Dartlec]

I've wondered about this scenario before.
I've never done this but hypothetically and creatively is there anything to stop you doing another EICR certificate stating:
Purpose "Confirming that remedial works required by inspection on dd/mm/yyyy listed on certificate xxxxxx have been carried out"
Limitations "Limited to checking Supply characteristics, Earthing and Bonding arrangements, that loop tests correlate with previous certificate xxxxx, and remedial works are completed"
Then most items would be LIM unless they were previously coded in which case they'd be a tick. Stick 5 years on it. Satisfactory certificate. Everyone's happy except the customer who's paid for a little bit more time.
Main risk is if original inspector missed something but on other hand the limitation is fairly clear.
Thoughts welcome!

That sounds like a very sensible solution - as long as the original certificate passes the 'smell test' that gives the client a piece of paper with Satisfactory on for those who care, and limits your liability nicely.

Anyone who is savvy enough to be able to interpret a certificate should understand what you've done and as long as both certificates are always available it seems like a nice way to comply.

The issue would be with bad EICRS that are done in 20 minutes in order to quote for a new CU. But they would likely be picked up when verifying bonding and supply characteristics as that type of report barely seems to stretch to getting those right even.

 

[i=p/u]

Just gets to messy juggling diff sparks. Trust thy spark people.


Type into google how much for eicr , says 80 to £150 for 10 way board.

 

[Retroelectric]

Just gets to messy juggling diff sparks. Trust thy spark people.


Type into google how much for eicr , says 80 to £150 for 10 way board.

So if a £150 EICR failed on something like the gas bond had come off the clamp then the tester could charge £100 to reconnect as they know it would be cheaper than getting another EICR as that’s the only way they can get a satisfactory certificate without paying another electrician for another full test.
Everyone just wants page 1 to say satisfactory on an EICR the rest of it could be blank for all they care.

 

[Dartlec]

So if a £150 EICR failed on something like the gas bond had come off the clamp then the tester could charge £100 to reconnect as they know it would be cheaper than getting another EICR as that’s the only way they can get a satisfactory certificate without paying another electrician for another full test.
Everyone just wants page 1 to say satisfactory on an EICR the rest of it could be blank for all they care.

Just using an EICR for their legislation was a "simple" solution that has caused lots of issues due to poor guidance, the scam artists and the way it was implemented.

I did wonder whether a simple additional list for domestic rental properties created at the time of the original certificate might have some benefits - which lists exactly the remedial work necessary to be carried out (C2s and any C1s that weren't corrected immediately) - Then each item could be ticked/signed as it was done - as long as the entire list is completed, then landlord has complied.

Currently I've seen plenty of EICRs with C2s where it's not immediately obvious what the problem or the solution is, because of poor form filling.

Changing a pendant shouldn't really need the original inspector to come back and re test - and it should also be possible for the landlord to use someone competent in changing pendants (but not maybe in EICRs) to do so. Whereas a CU change obviously needs a higher level of competence, registration etc.

I generally have prior agreement to change fittings as I go if necessary, but obviously that's not always the case.

There would also be issues with that system no doubt, and the "bad" landlords would continue to employ people who pass things incorrectly - but at least it would be a recognised way for letting agents, tenants, and other non electrical people to know what work has to be done.

 

[buzzlightyear]

In your dreams

so the first guy done the test certs came unsatisfactory and and all remedial works carried out on any minors , so do you think the persons going to alter the paper work for nowt ,i dont think so . has long has the EICR say satisfactory on it ,but if the the up grade of a consumer unit is replaced the EICR work the paper it was written or tap finger on a lap top.

 

[i=p/u]

Here ya brother, 2 possibles to blame now tho.

 

[Soi disant]

Blue and brown showing on a pendant.... is that dangerous or even potentially??? Just untidy.

improvement recommended. C3- satisfactory report.

And if you're a landlord whose electrician has given it a C2, and the clock has sarted ticking....?

 

[Soi disant]

I've wondered about this scenario before.
I've never done this but hypothetically and creatively is there anything to stop you doing another EICR certificate stating:
Purpose "Confirming that remedial works required by inspection on dd/mm/yyyy listed on certificate xxxxxx have been carried out"

Nothing to do with hypotheses or creativity at all: the law does not explicity require EICRs at all.

​