How not to standard is this rewire?

[JimCee]

Hi,
My son has just (last week) had a rewire done on his house in Leyland. He has just bought the house but a "domino" type consumer unit was spotted and so a rewire was deemed necessary.
He wanted to move in with his girlfriend and 2 month old son as quickly as possible so phoned a website to get electricians to call him with quotes based on the job being done ASAP.
Electrician gave him a quote £3000 and he accepted - work could be done the following week. The day arrived and was completed in the day by "a load of very young people" and the house was in a right state.
They have run 4 spurs in the house which I thought was pretty poor for a rewire and I don't know if this is to regulations.
But the real problem came when I was reboarding the loft. There were a load of chopped wires in the way of the boards so I pulled them back as far as possible and cut them further back. Whilst pulling the wires, the skirting board fell off. Behind the skirting board, there was a hole in the plaster board and an old fashioned connection block (with screws) fell out as did the ends of 2 conductors. One of the 3 wires that came out of this block was in the way of the boards. As conductors had dropped out, obviously an old wire I thought and so started cutting it with my electrical cutters and the upstairs socket ring tripped.
On investigation, the new upstairs socket ring has been cut, the earth conductors cut back - breaking the earth ring, the positive and neutral conductors having been pushed into the connector but not screwed down properly and the cable that I had cut - upon tracing was actually an open live cable - just lying under the loft insulation.
Looking round, the new lighting circuit has been extended - also by means of an old fashioned type connector block with screws in and taped up.
I was furious and phoned the electrician who between my rants told me that it was perfectly reasonable to extend the lighting circuit by means of a taped up connector block with screws to secure the conductors.
The electrician has given my son an electrical certificate (which I haven't seen and probably wouldn't understand) but on reading info on the internet, I cannot understand how he has done a test with the earth conductors on the upstairs ring being cut back at the loose connection block breaking the circuit.
The guy is coming back on Monday to "have a look what is going on" but apart from being outright dangerous with an open ended live cable, are the old fashioned screw type connector blocks acceptable - whether taped or un-taped, are spurs to standard and can I report this guy and if so, who to?
Thanks for any advice,
Jim.

 

[swaRRR]

he ended up with an 18 month suspended sentence for issuing an EIC for the electrical works despite not being an electrician!

Didn't know there was a legal requirement to fill in certs? The rules as far as i know say competency is what's required. Did he get prosecuted for issuing them without competence?

 

[Baddegg]

Didn't know there was a legal requirement to fill in certs? The rules as far as i know say competency is what's required. Did he get prosecuted for issuing them without competence?

I’d imagine that’s the legal definition mate yea but ultimately the judge saw it as fraud as he had no qualifications and certainly could not have stood up and proved himself competent to carry out the works, or notify them to building control and ultimately to anyone else outside of any trade, qualifications are the basic standard to proving competent

 

[swaRRR]

I’d imagine that’s the legal definition mate yea but ultimately the judge saw it as fraud as he had no qualifications and certainly could not have stood up and proved himself competent to carry out the works, or notify them to building control and ultimately to anyone else outside of any trade, qualifications are the basic standard to proving competent

I mean you'd think at least a basic T+I cert would be required to even be allowed to carry out any work that involves testing, imo. Not even necessarily the full-fat 2391 but something that proves you can at least carry out the basic tests.

 

[Baddegg]

I mean you'd think at least a basic T+I cert would be required to even be allowed to carry out any work that involves testing, imo. Not even necessarily the full-fat 2391 but something that proves you can at least carry out the basic tests.

Carrying out the tests is one thing interpreting the results another

 

[brianmoooore]

The prosecution was more than likely for claiming to be a member of a scheme that he was not.

 

[UNG]

Didn't know there was a legal requirement to fill in certs? The rules as far as i know say competency is what's required. Did he get prosecuted for issuing them without competence?

If you were in court in the dock how would you prove beyond reasonable doubt to a judge and jury you were competent and more to the point sufficiently skilled to carry out the work / task you were contracted to do,

The problem these days is the disconnect between the theory and practical aspects of the industry and the time taken to achieve the properly skilled end result which rather than the 4 - 5 years of apprenticeship shadowing and being nurtured by skilled electricians that was the norm has now become days, weeks or a few months with the I want it now society that has appeared in the last 15 - 20 years who are easily offended when their skill level is challenged

I have a 2391 IMO it is and has become since it's introduction more worthless as time has moved on, it ticks a box for me but way back when I was at college we actually learnt how to properly test and inspect spending a lot of time on the choice of test meters and understanding the function and limitations of them it was all part of the core qualifications in becoming an electrician

If you look at BS7671 Part 2 some time ago the definition of competent person was removed and replaced by skilled person (electrically) while we have still have competent persons schemes today should these have not become skilled persons schemes or was the skillset of many of the members of competent persons deemed not to be of a level high enough to become members of a skilled persons scheme. The definition also references regulation16 of the EAWR 1989 which requires persons to be competent to prevent danger and injury and the HSE publication HSR provides guidance on this

The apprenticeship which is dismissed by some as unnecessary and is just cheap labour was an underpinning part of the transition to becoming a skilled electrician especially on site yet today's training systems seem to totally ignore that and churn out at best minimally skilled labourers who are told to get employed as improvers with little or no practical skills to improve on

How can someone carry out a proper and decent EICR's on wiring systems they have no understanding or knowledge of that can date back to 60+ years ago this is when electrics becomes more than just a few wires, an EIC on a new installation should be a little easier to establish a skill level needed to certify an installation when dealing with current wiring systems

So how would you / do you assess the skills needed to be competent to carry out an EIC or EICR, and again how would a court of law assess it

 

[DannyC94]

I’d definitely recommend legal advice, and I think I’d approach in this order…

1. Put in writing to him that you have concerns and why they are and that you’d like them rectified
2. Arrange for another reputable spark to inspect and report on the install as it stands, take loads of pictures, if @UNG has offered take him up on that offer
3. Now go back to the original installer with the report and give him in writing the chance to rectify, personally I think at this stage he will break contact once he realises an actual electrician has been involved.
4 give him a week or two and keep logging your contact attempts
5. Now you can contact solicitors, his scheme, trading standards and building control

I’ve recently been involved in putting right works by a cowboy builder who fleeced the customer for £30k for some absolutely shocking works, they actually got him to court and he was prosecuted, he ended up with an 18 month suspended sentence for issuing an EIC for the electrical works despite not being an electrician!

I had someone give me some info on the things that are wrong - and tbf the boss came yesterday and did rectify the majority of it….there’s still the issue with some of the stuff on the certificate though, and apparently I need to sign to say I don’t want surge protection? If so I wasn’t even asked about this. He was very apologetic tbf to him and brought the lad back who put them connection blocks in the loft - you could tell he wasn’t happy with him at all!

 

[swaRRR]

I had someone give me some info on the things that are wrong - and tbf the boss came yesterday and did rectify the majority of it….there’s still the issue with some of the stuff on the certificate though, and apparently I need to sign to say I don’t want surge protection? If so I wasn’t even asked about this. He was very apologetic tbf to him and brought the lad back who put them connection blocks in the loft - you could tell he wasn’t happy with him at all!

Surge protection is mandatory unless the client doesn't want it. So do you want it? Because if you do they have to install it.

And to be cynical: don't believe the theatre from 'the boss' - he knows what's going on and it's very likely he refuses to pay for proper maintenance free boxes etc which is why they have to do stuff like taping them up. I've seen these bosses before, they tell the client whatever they want to hear to pass blame onto the worker while behind closed doors they're cheap and ruthless.

 

[Baddegg]

I had someone give me some info on the things that are wrong - and tbf the boss came yesterday and did rectify the majority of it….there’s still the issue with some of the stuff on the certificate though, and apparently I need to sign to say I don’t want surge protection? If so I wasn’t even asked about this. He was very apologetic tbf to him and brought the lad back who put them connection blocks in the loft - you could tell he wasn’t happy with him at all!

Personally you’d be mad to sign a form regarding something that should’ve been but in and wouldn’t have cost much at all….the same goes for the quality of consumer unit you’ve got, the difference between that and a better brand with surge included along with each circuit being protected by an individual rcbo is probably around £100….he has really scrimped on the materials on your instal which to me reflects his attitude to his work,
Fair play to him for coming back but I can’t imagine he’s rectified all that needs doing after the pics we’ve seen, for instance why was his reasoning behind removing the cpcs on the “spur” he’d installed?
Obviously he’s thrown the lad under the bus, but EVERYTHING someone in his employment does is his responsibility even more so for a trainee…..
I’d also be very sceptical of any new certification you received as he’s made it up once how will know he’s done it properly again…..
But ultimately all we can do is advise and give the benefit of our experience, it’s your sons house and he sleeps there…..

 

[UNG]

I had someone give me some info on the things that are wrong - and tbf the boss came yesterday and did rectify the majority of it….there’s still the issue with some of the stuff on the certificate though, and apparently I need to sign to say I don’t want surge protection? If so I wasn’t even asked about this. He was very apologetic tbf to him and brought the lad back who put them connection blocks in the loft - you could tell he wasn’t happy with him at all!

Did he carry out anymore testing so he can fill in the values that are missing on the certificate?
Having looked at the certificate again I think the guy needs to proof read it as well as some of the values look a bit mixed up