HELP! EICR advice please

[Deleted account]

Agree with above...
sire experience essential.
I did the 2395 EICR. But even after doing that I did the first 3 or 4 condition reports with an someone with years of experience of EICRs. In fact it was the guy who taught the course who is also a friend.
if I hadn’t I most probably would have messed my first few up.
so I’d like to amend my previous statement And say that in order to donEICRs do the course AND get some on site training In EICRs. At th3 very least get someone to r3view the first several EICRs you do.

 

[a111an]

Thanks, everyone for your detailed responses. So pleased I asked for help here, the report and quote didn't seem right.

I'm going to go back (again!) to the company and just ask them 3 questions below and hope they won't come back again with another vague blanket response.

Question 1
C2 - Additional RCD protection is required for circuits supplying outdoor equipment...The general and kitchen sockets are on RCD protection (although the trip times are missing in the report) and it's a 3rd floor flat. I can't see why outdoor equipment would be mentioned? Please explain.

Question 2
C2 - Consumer unit is not fire rated...
Looking at the report it is a C2 on the Observations page, but on the Inspection schedule page, it's a C3. Which is it? Please explain.

Question 3
The draft quote has 'Replace fixed bathroom fittings' at £154+vat. What is this?

I don't have much hope on the response, but am relieved I won't be giving them any more money. Just disappointed I'll need to start again and pay for another report elsewhere.

If there are any electrians here that would be interested in giving me a quote for a EICR for a 2 bedroom flat in Purfleet, Essex. I would also look at getting the wired fire alarm replaced and possible moving the 2 lighting circuits to the RCD bit or replacing with RCBOs. It looks like the other remediation work was fictitious.

 

[westward10]

They are fair enough questions, so you confirmed all socket outlets are on the rcd.

 

[a111an]

They are fair enough questions, so you confirmed all socket outlets are on the rcd.

Yes, almost certain that both kitchen and general ring mains are on RCD. I also have a report from 2018 that tested the socket for tripping in the hallway. The CU picture is a little blurry but does match up to the new report and shows both sockets within the RCD block.

 

[Dartlec]

That looks like a LeGrand/Tenby board, which appears to have been the go to for Barratt flats around that era and maybe other builders.

I've done several EICRs on them and found issues, but nothing that's required a new consumer unit yet (apart from a recent one where it was manky and the place was being refurbed). You can still buy parts for them for one thing, but unless they are severely damaged they are usually still very servicable.

This looks very similar to one I looked at in Southend earlier this year - a dual tariff board with the off peak side storage heaters and immersion non-rcd protected. There is probably a consumer unit somewhere in an external communal cupboard, with 16mm T&E to the board, protected by MCBs.

If it's as I think, then the C2 for additional RCD protection (which mentions Circuit 10), is for the off peak side, and there will be no socket outlets on there, so no opportunity to supply outdoor equipment and therefore not a C2 even if it wasn't a 3rd floor flat. (Assuming someone hasn't added a socket somewhere)

The C2 for fire rating is bogus - I don't think even NAPIT codebreakers (which is known for being 'strict') goes that far and the other guidance definitely does not. C3 at most unless there are signs of heat damage.

The flat I checked did have supplementary bonding in place, in which case the other C2 would also be irrelevant. (As mentioned, it is also ticked in the schedule in this case)

As also already mentioned, the smoke detectors expiry is a point of comment but not a code.

The tick boxes on the form are rather randomly ticked, including for inappropriate things like switched alternative to the public supply.

The fact that no RCD disconnection times are stated is also concerning - either the RCD failed, in which case it would obviously be noted as a departure by itself, or they forgot to make a note of them...

Regarding the quote:

The DB supply and install price is actually not too awful, *if* they were quoting for RCBOs for every circuit - though I wonder if they've factored in the off peak circuits in that too.

The price for replacing an optical smoke detector seems extravagant, especially if they are already there doing other work.

My guess is that the bathroom fittings may be for the downlights in the bathroom, which are probably badly connected with single insulation visible and may not be not bathroom rated ones, though they may well be outside the zones anyway. If this is so, they should have noted those as a code really and they've ticked the schedule to say it's fine.

So overall - based on the quality of their EICR I'd definitely think twice about going ahead with that quote. How can you be sure they'd properly test and certificate the new CU install, based on the issues with this certificate?

I'm the other side of the river, but only 20 minutes or so on a good day from it, so if you want me to give you a quote PM me. I can't promise it will pass first time, but I can guarantee that any remedial works would be suitably justified.

 

[Dartlec]

Just spotted another issue too - circuit 9 "heaters" is on a 32A in 2.5mm, but not tested for ring continuity.

The flat I checked did have a ring for the heaters, so I bet they forgot to test it.

 

[jackhammerJIM]

The amount of mistakes on the report brings the testers competency into dispute . I would get it retested by someone on this forum and refuse to pay the bill for the original EICR .
90 % sure it would be a satisfactory report if i had carried out the EICR .

 

[westward10]

I think your best bet is to prove the Report is incorrect, demand a refund and take @Dartlec up on his offer.

 

[Dartlec]

We've all made silly mistakes when doing a certificate late at night, but given the number on this report, it would be pulled apart in court were something to happen - or even if the local authority requested a copy and someone who knew what they were doing looked at it.

Not sure which scheme this company are with, but another alternative may be to approach them with specific concerns - though my suspicion is that they are often not terribly helpful, I can't see how they could see this report and say 'well that all seems fine'...

 

[Micktw68]

The tick boxes are always a dead giveaway of slapdash inspection.
I was pulled quite early on in my career by an eagle eyed QS who grilled me on where the other sources were located that I’d ticked As present.

 

[Simon47]

We have a problem at the moment in so far as the new laws regarding rental properties and eicrs.
i have to say I absolutely agree with the new laws.

The problem is There are thousands of landlords requiring EICRs now.

And the charlatans lined up and rubbing their hands with glee

So what is the answer? The landlord/lady lives hundreds of miles away so has to trust a third party to manage the property!

Based on my experience, I'd not consider having a property that wasn't close enough to manage myself. I've seen from the landlord's side that they don't know what they are doing*, and I've seen from the tenant's side (thanks to offspring in various rented places, as well as comments from tenants when I did use an agent) that they don't care and don't offer a decent service.
* Last one was when I got an email from the agent (let only) saying that I HAD to get an EICR done, blah, blah, blah. Funny, but I didn't get a reply when I pointed out five false statements in just 2 sentences - or pretty much everything they said !
Sadly, it's not an isolated occurance - I routinely get given information that's (at best) "misleadingly written" because it's supplied by some trade body or other with an eye on work for it's members rather than being honest. The agents (at least the smaller local ones) don't have the technical ability to write this stuff - so they have to rely on what they are told.

They provide an essential service, helping to relieve landlords of all that back-breaking work that they might otherwise have to do themselves.

If only

I really think there are sparks who think they are fully qualified doing EICR’s and are so far out of their depth that they don’t know what they are doing

I think part of the problem is the tendency to "install by numbers" - they don't know the regs, and can only follow the rules of thumb so "RFC on B32, lights on B6, ..." See the thread here where supposedly qualified electricians are telling someone that only a pull cord switch is allowed in a bathroom.
EDIT: It's a very different skill set doing testing vs house bashing installs, and a different set again for diagnostics. Sadly, I've found that the heating engineers are often no better at diagnostics - I remember one occasion when the boiler in the flat was playing up and it was only when I told them what the fault was (after several visits by different engineers that failed to identify it) that they actually fixed it. And all it was was a failed microswitch so the boiler didn't know when hot water was being called for - p**s-poor design to put it right where any leaks would drip on it.

I think your best bet is to prove the Report is incorrect, demand a refund and take @Dartlec up on his offer.

I'd agree. Furthermore, consider reporting the outfit to whichever scam ... err I mean approved scheme ... they are a member of. Unless they are reported and the scam does something, then they'll carry on fleecing vulnerable landlords. Of course, we don't expect the scam to throw out a member who's paying their membership fee

We've all made silly mistakes when doing a certificate late at night, but given the number on this report, it would be pulled apart in court were something to happen - or even if the local authority requested a copy and someone who knew what they were doing looked at it.

Trouble is, the clockis ticking on the 28 day rule, and the LA won't care and probably don't employ anyone who'd know an EICR from a MWC. All they'll see is "unsatisfactory" and go off to add it to their statistics.

 

[a111an]

A little update and after a fair bit of back and forth the company have agreed to refund for the report.

Below are there responses to my questions from the company, I don't think I need to comment further!

Going forward I now need to arrange another test with a competent person. Thanks everyone for all the excellent advice.

Question 1
C2 - Additional RCD protection is required for circuits supplying outdoor equipment...The general and kitchen sockets are on RCD protection (although the trip times are missing in the report) and it's a 3rd floor flat. I can't see why outdoor equipment would be mentioned? Please explain.

​

If I'm being honest, this is an observation which we come across in 90% of all properties so it's on the template we use. It doesn't relate to this property.​

​

Question 2
C2 - Consumer unit is not fire rated...
Looking at the report it is a C2 on the Observations page, but on the Inspection schedule page, it's a C3. Which is it? Please explain.

​

Further to our telephone conversation with regards to it being a local authority requirement I had a quick look and they advise to follow the government requirements which would class this as a C3 as per your observation page, sorry to be a right pain but I know the Landlord will do their research.​

​

Again, referring to our call, we have found the majority of local authorities are insisting on this. Especially, the London boroughs.​

​

Question 3
The draft quote has 'Replace fixed bathroom fittings' at £154+vat. What is this?

​

As you can see from the images these are not IP rated. It's an error on our part, juggling the sheer volume of work we taken on in the last few months, the reports were being handwritten and then typed up by our operations staff, the cross-over admittedly created a few issues, all our engineers now have their own laptops and are creating the reports on site.​

​

Smoke detectors – are not part of the regs, the installation supply is but not the expiry date in relation to an EICR.

​

This mostly comes down to preference from the agents we work with, most of whom, instruct us to check the alarms whilst we're carrying out our tests. As you can see from the images attached the alarms within the property have expired.​

 

[westward10]

Thanks for the update and a good result. Their reasoning quite frankly is poor, using templates, passing the buck to others and following third party guidance as opposed to the requirements of BS7671.
I am afraid to say this is now typical of our industry and I hope you get a better outcome in the future.

 

[Dartlec]

A little update and after a fair bit of back and forth the company have agreed to refund for the report.

Below are there responses to my questions from the company, I don't think I need to comment further!

Going forward I now need to arrange another test with a competent person. Thanks everyone for all the excellent advice.

Question 1
C2 - Additional RCD protection is required for circuits supplying outdoor equipment...The general and kitchen sockets are on RCD protection (although the trip times are missing in the report) and it's a 3rd floor flat. I can't see why outdoor equipment would be mentioned? Please explain.

​

If I'm being honest, this is an observation which we come across in 90% of all properties so it's on the template we use. It doesn't relate to this property.​

​

Question 2
C2 - Consumer unit is not fire rated...
Looking at the report it is a C2 on the Observations page, but on the Inspection schedule page, it's a C3. Which is it? Please explain.

​

Further to our telephone conversation with regards to it being a local authority requirement I had a quick look and they advise to follow the government requirements which would class this as a C3 as per your observation page, sorry to be a right pain but I know the Landlord will do their research.​

​

Again, referring to our call, we have found the majority of local authorities are insisting on this. Especially, the London boroughs.​

​

Question 3
The draft quote has 'Replace fixed bathroom fittings' at £154+vat. What is this?

​

As you can see from the images these are not IP rated. It's an error on our part, juggling the sheer volume of work we taken on in the last few months, the reports were being handwritten and then typed up by our operations staff, the cross-over admittedly created a few issues, all our engineers now have their own laptops and are creating the reports on site.​

​

Smoke detectors – are not part of the regs, the installation supply is but not the expiry date in relation to an EICR.

​

This mostly comes down to preference from the agents we work with, most of whom, instruct us to check the alarms whilst we're carrying out our tests. As you can see from the images attached the alarms within the property have expired.​

Credit to them for backing down I guess - but that sounds like they realised that they wouldn't be able to defend that report should anyone with electrical knowledge see it.

The template comment is hardly encouraging - just makes you wonder how many other properties have had an incorrect C2 applied.