EICR unsatisfactory but was the report/ testing carried out also unsatisfactory?

[Flipflop77]

Hi, hopefully, you can help me by giving some guidance over the EICR which has failed for my rented property.
It was carried out by an electrician who is supplied via the managing agency.
The first contact I had was an email that stated the EICR had failed and some remedial work was required. Specifically: 'will need 2 new consumer units fitted to pass the EICR and comply with regulations, the existing ones are not metal clad and have no RCD protection, there is a consumer unit for the flat and another one for the storage heaters. This needs RCD protection as there is also a socket in the bathroom. The cost to install 2 consumer units including all materials would be £1100.'
I am not an electrician but I can see that changing the consumer units for metal units (they are in the hallway) with RCD protection is a good thing. So I am happy to get the work done but it feels more like an upgrade rather than fixing a currently lived in dangerous electrical environment?. From a little research, I believe the metal clad consumer unit is a recent change and not retrospective? I'm also not sure that no rcd protection is a problem as far as the report is concerned?
I asked for the EICR which was then provided. I was hoping this would clear these questions up but it has just raised more...
I have some questions:
1. I am trying to understand if there is a need to do the work which has been created by some C2s on the EICR? Should I have an EICR which passed and be able to get this work carried out without the 28 day limit? This does create time pressures that push me towards getting the work done with the creators of the report or am I too cynical?
2. The EICR seems to be poor. Not filled in with missing spaces and contradictions!? Agreed limitations: no removal of faceplates. I didn't agree this (maybe the managing agent did?). What is a possible reason for not doing this? The quote states 2 consumer units but the report test schedule only mentions one? Does this mean only one needs replacing?
3. Should I be getting the work done by the people who carried out the report? I guess this depends on your opinions on the first 2 questions but for me as a customer, something doesn't feel great.
4. The quote feels high? Or is that the landlord (me) just not liking bills!

As a non electricianist and I maybe completely wrong in my assumptions/ observations. Looking for some reassurance please.
Thank you for your time in reading this.
Hopefully all the personal details of both parties have been removed from the report!

 

[pc1966]

The wiring regulations are not in themselves retrospective (unlike fire rules), however, when doing an EICR the electrician should be looking at the risk from the installation and then coding it C1-C3 depending on how serious it is. If you want to see the usual guidance then many electricians follow the Best Practice guide #4 which is free from here, while some of it might be too technical for the general public to understand, a lot of it is fairly obvious when presented:

Best Practice Guides | Electrical Safety First

Electrical Safety First produces, in association with other industry bodies, a range of Best Practice Guides which provide definitive information and guidance on a range of technical subjects.

www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk

There are other competent body's guidance that treat some things like lack of RCD differently though.

If you look over this forum you will often see the lack of RCD as the most contentious point but most would accept the BPG#4 guidance of C3 unless for outdoor-likely sockets or bathrooms, then C2.

In your case the lack of a metal CU (consumer unit = fuse box) box is just C3, in like with this, but the RCD lack is really the reason for the C2 "unsatisfactory". However, if your CU is quite old or unusual brand it might not be possible to get new RCDs for it and then it really is a case of replacing the whole unit.

You do not have to use the same electrician who did the EICR to do the remedial work. Having said that, if there is nothing untoward about them then it is simpler.

You would need to give more info about the proposed work to get an idea if it is a reasonable quote or not. If you are somewhere like London and they are offering a board with RCBOs (so each circuit has its own RCD along with MCB in the one RCBO device) then the price you have is not unreasonable. But if bothers get a 2nd quote.

However, such work is notifiable under Part P of the England and Wales building regulations so make sure whoever does it is a member of one of the competent person schemes such as NICEIC, etc, so they can notify building control without added inspection costs.

 

[pc1966]

Just looked at it more and your comment:

The EICR seems to be poor. Not filled in with missing spaces and contradictions!? Agreed limitations: no removal of faceplates. I didn't agree this (maybe the managing agent did?). What is a possible reason for not doing this? The quote states 2 consumer units but the report test schedule only mentions one? Does this mean only one needs replacing?

That is not a good sign, as the CU list has 6 circuits with at least 4 in use but only 2 tested even for IR (insulation resistance). Some photos of the CUs and some more detail on the proposed work is needed badly!

 

[westward10]

In my opinion you have been conned. They tested 30% of circuits as stated that equates to two circuits, was this discussed with you. They claim a full visual inspection then state no face plates were removed.
Unfortunately this is not uncommon as the EICR market has become a free for all littered with non competent person's out to make a fast Buck.
Do your consumer units need replacing probably, would I use these people absolutely no way. I would take this up with the agent as they have not carried out a full test.
What did you get charged?

 

[James]

In my opinion you have been conned. They tested 30% of circuits as stated that equates to two circuits, was this discussed with you. They claim a full visual inspection then state no face plates were removed.
Unfortunately this is not uncommon as the EICR market has become a free for all littered with non competent person's out to make a fast Buck.
Do your consumer units need replacing probably, would I use these people absolutely no way. I would take this up with the agent as they have not carried out a full test.
What did you get charged?

not pulling you punches today are you? @westward10

however, i do agree that it is a poor job.
bet the agent still got her £50 commission on the job though!!

 

[westward10]

You say there is a socket in the bathroom, is this a 13A socket if so where is it located.

 

[Julie.]

I would suggest that this was a cheap eicr, probably ~£150 or so, spent very little time to look at the whole installation.

You get what you pay for unfortunately, if you go for a quick cheap thing then it will only cover a very small portion of the scope this is fairly normal for agencies as they just want the cheapest report they can get. (Usually inline with the majority of their landlords requirements).

In spite of a cheap and fairly (too) brief inspection, I would suggest it has identified some key issues you need to address, there appears to be a socket outlet in the bathroom (within 3m) - which is a C2, and there is no rcd protection for presumably multiple circuits in the bathroom, this could be a C3 if there is proper bonding, but I would think the C2 is presented because there isn't correct bonding.

So you need to address these issues, the easiest way to fix these issues is predominantly by replacing the cu with one with rcds ; it may be possible to retrofit rcd in the existing (which would be compliant, but may be difficult physically).

Given there are issues, I would get a full inspection done (not a brief one), expect it to find many more issues, and then get all of these fixed.

You could of course argue C2 vs C3 for many of the other things, but ultimately if you need to fix one valid C2 by adding rcds then it sorts all the other ones out anyway.

 

[Flipflop77]

You would need to give more info about the proposed work to get an idea if it is a reasonable quote or not. If you are somewhere like London and they are offering a board with RCBOs (so each circuit has its own RCD along with MCB in the one RCBO device) then the price you have is not unreasonable. But if bothers get a 2nd quote.

Thanks for the speedy replies all.
You have all the info I currently have. A brief email quoting for the fix.
The property is not in London, outside the M25 infact.

 

[Flipflop77]

In my opinion you have been conned. They tested 30% of circuits as stated that equates to two circuits, was this discussed with you. They claim a full visual inspection then state no face plates were removed.
Unfortunately this is not uncommon as the EICR market has become a free for all littered with non competent person's out to make a fast Buck.
Do your consumer units need replacing probably, would I use these people absolutely no way. I would take this up with the agent as they have not carried out a full test.
What did you get charged?

The cost was £190 and I think that included vat.

 

[Flipflop77]

You say there is a socket in the bathroom, is this a 13A socket if so where is it located.

Now this requires my memory and its not working today.
I have no idea where the socket could be. I did think maybe its a shaver socket, but I'm not sure there is one!

 

[DPG]

Hasn't this same post been on here a few days ago?

 

[Flipflop77]

Hasn't this same post been on here a few days ago?

I only joined yesterday. I did post it yesterday but then wasn't sure it was the correct place so it got deleted a few minutes later...

 

[westward10]

The cost was £190 and I think that included vat.

£190 for what probably equated to an hour and a half of work. I suspect they took one look at your consumer units and based the entire Report on that. I suspect the "full visual inspection" was a cursory glance around the rooms.
Was you aware of the 30% test of the total circuits.

 

[Flipflop77]

£190 for what probably equated to an hour and a half of work. I suspect they took one look at your consumer units and based the entire Report on that. I suspect the "full visual inspection" was a cursory glance around the rooms.
Was you aware of the 30% test of the total circuits.

The agent arranged the EICR. I was told one was needed and they would sort it out. I was not aware of the 30% test.

 

[Julie.]

The agent arranged the EICR. I was told one was needed and they would sort it out. I was not aware of the 30% test.

Basically as I thought it's a cheap test, I would imagine the agent takes a cut of that.

Your installation needs some updating/work as it looks to have been identified correctly, but as stated previously, I would get a full inspection and fix all that is found.

 

[westward10]

Cheap, £80 per circuit.............

 

[Julie.]

Cheap, £80 per circuit.............

It's cheap in comparison to doing a proper job!