Mandatory EICRs in Rental Properties - 1 year or 5 years

[Spazz]

Please post your comments on here - state if you think EICRs should be done every year or 5 years.
Also please state your reason behind your choice - please don't put money!, profit for us, cost to landlords etc!

I will put this forward to Parliament in favor of which one is considered best by the experts in the field (us)

Please sticky this as well please

 

[Des 56]

Yes we still have cowboys doing work without notifying it - but the fault of that lays with the home owner! They should check for NICEIC at least!

NICEIC is widely known and something as easy as a logo on the van or ID is the easy thing- the problem is people dont check!

If you made that statement over ten years ago.it would have a smidgen of truth about it

Nicholas,do you honestly believe that scheme membership gives assurance to anybody that the person is competent or even an electrician in the first place

Surely you are aware that there are as many competent and unregistered electricians,(either not wanting, or employed, and not requiring registration) as there are charlatons posing as electricians,kitted out with pretty Niceic logos and the all important incompetence to boot for this part p fiasco

​

 

[Spazz]

I was waiting for that Des - Yes I am aware - like I said before the government needs to make a campaign to show home owners how to check if someone is registered

Again like I said before the other problem is that these schemes are in it for the money - nothing else!

Again nothing to do with Part P - its the schemes this time!

The idea of Part P is fine - its how it has been put into place.


I know alot blame the Part P but come on - lets have one person explain why Part P is so bad and what can be done about it to fix it that without having a negative effect on anything else - because I promise you now tif Part P solves the problems that you all say - they will make other problems and the same ones will moan again just because they have to find something to moan about!

and notice its always the same ones - says something!


Come on Im opening this to the floor - post a problem with Part P and a solution for it! - otherwise drop this bloody Part P Moan!

 

[Geordie Spark]

What about the drive bys though how are you going to combat that? As I and others have said, bring in what you're proposing and the incidence of drive by I&T will increase exponentially, thus reducing fees and making it uneconomical for anyone to do it properly. Even a perfectly reputable company could unwittingly employ a lazy git, I've seen it a boatload of times where guys make up test results.

I saw a bloke doing a full test using a £7 multimeter from Maplin - NOT a Multifunction Tester - just a multimeter and he somehow managed to provide figures for Insulation Resistance, Ze, Zs and a full range of RCD tests !!!

What was that certificate worth ???

 

[Geordie Spark]

Yes we still have cowboys doing work without notifying it - but the fault of that lays with the home owner! They should check for NICEIC at least!

NICEIC is widely known and something as easy as a logo on the van or ID is the easy thing- the problem is people dont check!

If you made that statement over ten years ago.it would have a smidgen of truth about it

Nicholas,do you honestly believe that scheme membership gives assurance to anybody that the person is competent or even an electrician in the first place

Surely you are aware that there are as many competent and unregistered electricians,(either not wanting, or employed, and not requiring registration) as there are charlatons posing as electricians,kitted out with pretty Niceic logos and the all important incompetence to boot for this part p fiasco

​

Have any of you had a Gas Safe registered bloke working in your house & have you ever asked to see his registration card? If so, did any of you look at the back of it to see if he was qualified to work on the appliance he was in your house to work on ??

I was CORGI registered for years & never once was I asked by a customer to show my card !!!

The fact is that your average punter doesn't care how many bits of paper or fancy plastic cards you have hung around your neck on a bit of string. All they want is for their appliance to work !!

 

[UNG]

I have had the Welsh Housing Minister come back to me in regards to this:

He said he thinks its going to cost the landlords more than they are currently spending now

I need an idea of how much landlords/homeowners are spending on an annual basis when they are in crisis mode only

I am thinking about £300 - £500 depending on what goes wrong (per year)

I also have to state the annual cost of EICRs every year and MEICR every change of tenant
Im thinking:
£450-£500 - first year (New CU and MEICR (IR, Zs and RCD Test)
£250 - £300 - every year (EICR and MEICR

Any other ideas on this would be greatly appreciated

I am also thinking - this should decrease insurance policies (reducing risk of fire, electric shocks, etc)

Spend on a crisis basis could be a roof leak a burst pipe in fact a lot of things that are not electrical. The rent has to cover a lot of things not least servicing the loan on the property. There are a lot of people moaning about the rents being to high now and your £250 - £300 per year is another £5 -£6 a week on the rent

You need to look closer to home for landlord costs as you know at least one and you need to focus on all areas of the property costs not just the electrical

Why is it everything you check is going to need a new CU seems to me the 17th regs where designed to educate a minority that everyone needs a new CU as it's good for business

Insurance companies don't ask for EICR's now and if the electrics in every house in the land is as bad as you suggest they are then I can only see premiums rising having drawn their attention to the increased risk they now find themselves insuring

I do agree why should we pay to check that idiot tenants haven't made the installation a hazard!
But you say that its their fault and only their fault - but think about it this way if a tenant modifies something and a landlord does not have it checked then the next tenant is killed (worse case) who is to blame?

THE LANDLORD because they have a legal responsibility to ensure that the electrical installation is safe at the start and during the whole tenancy!
I agree that this is not right but the problem is that this is the case!

somersetspark - you seem like a decent landlord - and like you say everyone that you checked is fine - again responsible landlords but what about those you don't check?

The problem is that those who are not responsible are the ones who let the whole lot down - same as with sparks and everything else!

So what is needed is to have a tenant idiocy test if you are to big an idiot you don't get to rent

How do you intend to police the dodgy electrics on the neighbourhood cannabis farms

The best thing which could happen is that T&I becomes notifiable!

This way all T&I are sent to the LABC - same as MOTs are sent to VOSA

There needs to be policing on this! and the only way that will happen is if all EICRs are sent to LABC.

MEICRs will then become like Pre MOTs - advisable and a good idea to check that the Electrics will pass the main MOT when it comes around.

Even Gas should be the same - all notifiable

We have to notify that the work is up to scratch when we do it in the first place so why should we not have to make sure that they comply year after year after year.

If they become notifiable then it wont just effect rentals - it will effect owned properties as well!

And once the database is formed are you going to go down the street fining householders who haven't got an up to date house MOT and insurance as an electrical fire could burn down the neighbours house. Tony Blair as PM was bad enough but going to Eric Blair's 1984 totalitarian state would definitely be a giant step to far

 

[Plonker 3]

Nic the ESC all ready recommend what you are proposing, a EICR every 5 years or change of tenancy. So surely contacting them them for some back up would be a good place to start?


http://www.esc.org.uk/fileadmin/use...guides_and_advice/ESC_Tenants___Checklist.pdf

 

[oldtimer]

Guys just to clarify yes the MEICR does not exist but if you read earlier it was/is meant to be an imrovement of the VEICR (Visual) that does exist and that the Schemies are pushing as an interm check between EICRs as I have said before EICR every 5-6 years with a MEICR on change of tenant instead of the VEICR .

Also note as well as ensuring there is a good Ze ,Zs at the sockets and if applicable ensuring the RCDs are operating because as we all know that test every 3 months sticker is just a get out of jail card you would still be doing a visual.

Now on sayng all of this is it going to happen of course not but I am not comfortable with a VEICR because that will be a drive by and sadly me thinks the Schemies will push for this.Maybe one day they will consult with us instead of handing down a dictate

One last point my reasong for converting the VEICR to a improved MEICR is to add some basic checks to the existing VEICR and to point out that there have been a few incidents where the property has lost its earth due to gas/water pipes being changed to plastic

 

[StuSpiers]

Well if somebody wants to come into my rented house every 5 years and do some half baked EICR which the results will almost be guaranteed to have been made up due to sheer work load, they can nob off.

A rented house is just like any other it falls to the tenant to report any dangerous condition.

Tenants are not allowed to carry out diy without permission/certs.

^ that's what is supposed to happen, does it? - no not always

Is life perfect? - no

 

[UNG]

Des you say this - what will removing Part P do?

The only thing it ill do is give free rain to anyone to do their own electrics without having a requirement to having them checked after!

This is a licence to kill!

Look at the stats and you will see how many lives where saved by Part P coming in!

Yes we still have cowboys doing work without notifying it - but the fault of that lays with the home owner! They should check for NICEIC at least!

NICEIC is widely known and something as easy as a logo on the van or ID is the easy thing- the problem is people dont check!

These customers are opening the door to these cowboys to do bog jobs then they moan because they had been told to spend more money fixing the problems!

The other big problem is some electricians are signing off Joe Blogs work! These are the worst! And there are some on here doing it - they already identified themselves on other posts!

By the same argument what has bringing in Part P achieved any stats for Part P improving safety must be looked at along with the introduction of the 17th edition so which has had the greater effect in improving safety

How can you or any other person suggest that the number of lives saved can be attributed wholly to the introduction of Part P is beyond me, how many people reported an RCD tripping incident that may have killed them i.e. their live was saved and was the RCD fitted because of Part P or the 17th edition or even the 16th edition regs. I'm sorry but you are peddling meaningless stats that are in the public domain to massage public servants egos and bamboozle people like yourself

You quote "NICEIC at least" so can I assume you and your campaign are pushing for a single registration body as well with the NICEIC as your preferred registration body

I was waiting for that Des - Yes I am aware - like I said before the government needs to make a campaign to show home owners how to check if someone is registered

Again like I said before the other problem is that these schemes are in it for the money - nothing else!

Again nothing to do with Part P - its the schemes this time!

The idea of Part P is fine - its how it has been put into place.


I know alot blame the Part P but come on - lets have one person explain why Part P is so bad and what can be done about it to fix it that without having a negative effect on anything else - because I promise you now tif Part P solves the problems that you all say - they will make other problems and the same ones will moan again just because they have to find something to moan about!

and notice its always the same ones - says something!


Come on Im opening this to the floor - post a problem with Part P and a solution for it! - otherwise drop this bloody Part P Moan!

You still have not provided any irrefutable evidence that Part P has achieved anything apart from the baseless stats that you keep quoting in this and other threads. Until we have fully intelligent properties that report why the RCD has tripped or why any other incident occurred in the home then it would be hard to quantify and report accurately whether lives have been saved. Just because the figures show less deaths than the year before is no basis as to whether a particular initiative or law is working or not

You don't need to look very far for the major failing of Part P which is a quick course and then part with some money and become a legitimate registered member of a competent persons scheme may be the registration should detail what competance / experience level these people are at

 

[oldtimer]

UNG let me sum it up for you it is just a big bl00dy mess the last we need is one main Schemie it scares me as it is with the power they weald plus instead of improving our industry they have single handedly undermined it and as for Part P thank god it is not up here and why because they allowed every body and their dog to seek and get registration to such an extent that all they care about is sales and as for removing a membership because of bad workmanship give me a break lets get this abundantly clear it will take a death before they remove someones subscription and also we are all talking like we hope that they will get out of their white castles well my understanding is that they are lurking on this site but they aint going to admit that any day now.

As I see it their job is to guide / advise established businesses and to train and bring on newbies to the business but instead they stand with a big stick telling people to get in line and make sure you are paying your fees they are more interested in breaking up the trade to that many C&G qualifications that buy the way they are only to keen to sell to you to keep them in their gold plated saleries and pensions remember the debacle of the Part P review or in other words yes we know its a mess but we will not admit it so we will call it a review then there is the yes times are hard so lets change the 17th, I&T PAT testing and do some reviews so that these hard pressed clowns will have to buy new COPs,BGB,OSG new certification certificates
and when we are finished with them they will be begging to sign up to the new C&G courses that we will sell them plus we will show that we care by freezing the fees for a couple of years because they will not notice that we are milking them dry so in other words add all this up and we are screwed. So after all that does anybody still want to wear their Schemie badge with pride. I hope they are reading this because I want to see all of this nonsense cut back as a lawer said in the Levison enquiry "would you like to see new laws against phone hacking" and the witness replied no because there is already laws to protect the individual from that we dont need an extra layer of laws. So Schemies think on dont kill the golden goose

 

[somersetsparks]

I was waiting for that Des - Yes I am aware - like I said before the government needs to make a campaign to show home owners how to check if someone is registered

Again like I said before the other problem is that these schemes are in it for the money - nothing else!

Again nothing to do with Part P - its the schemes this time!

The idea of Part P is fine - its how it has been put into place.


I know alot blame the Part P but come on - lets have one person explain why Part P is so bad and what can be done about it to fix it that without having a negative effect on anything else - because I promise you now tif Part P solves the problems that you all say - they will make other problems and the same ones will moan again just because they have to find something to moan about!

and notice its always the same ones - says something!


Come on Im opening this to the floor - post a problem with Part P and a solution for it! - otherwise drop this bloody Part P Moan!

We didn't need it, it just makes more jobs for pen-pushers, it means employed, fully qualified sparks like myself who do not pay into the girt rip-off cannot even undertake work in their own home, while fred in the shed who did a 5 week course and is happy to part with £600 can.
It is purely jobs for the boys and the single worst thing that has ever happened to this industry, letting in essentially unskilled workers and watering down our skills and wages.
It is the end of proper sparks for domestic works im afraid, thats why everyone moans about it.
And then we get people coming along saying we need more red tape in the form of mandatory EICR's, no doubt they would then bring a 'domestic electrical tester' qualification which needed a 3 week course (and the mandatory £600 bribe/scheme membership)

See where i'm going?

Please drop this EICR/RCD stuff

 

[Risteard]

MEICRs only need IR on all circuits (not individuality)

Why would testing the installation or distribution board as a whole not be allowed for the full inspection and test, bearing in mind the effect of resistances in parallel and that the IET specifically recommends that the installation or distribution board should ideally be tested as a whole?

If testing individual circuits then you would need to consider the parallel resistances, i.e. 1/Rt = 1/R1 + 1/R2 + 1/R3 ...

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I know alot blame the Part P but come on - lets have one person explain why Part P is so bad and what can be done about it to fix it that without having a negative effect on anything else - because I promise you now tif Part P solves the problems that you all say - they will make other problems and the same ones will moan again just because they have to find something to moan about!
and notice its always the same ones - says something!

Come on Im opening this to the floor - post a problem with Part P and a solution for it! - otherwise drop this bloody Part P Moan!

Where to start?
It's a restrictive practice.
It criminalises anyone who conducts many aspects of electrical work who through ignorance or financial restraints does not either notify the LABC or engage a registered tradesman.
Whereas a householder can conduct gas work, it would be illegal for them to conduct some electrical work without paying an exhorbitant fee to their LABC.
It has not achieved it's stated aim of improving safety, nor has it improved standards of electrical installaion work.
If anything it has caused both to worsen.
It's an unnecessary layer of red tape.
To my mind the only people who have benefitted are the LABCs, the scheme providers, the training centers and MFT manufacturer's.
Neither the consumers or electricians have benefited, as they now have increased costs.

 

[kbl123]

Lets face it Testing and monitoring HAS to be done.
I would prefer a recognised,mandatory,NO GREY AREA direction on all domestic properties rented or not. I have worked on decent homes projects for councils and private landlords (some good, some bad). With that in mind i would say an EICR every 5 yrs what ever, regardless of single occupancy or HMO. A visual check version of EICR should be mandatory for all HMO's. This would enable proof of landlords duty of care as well as tenants safety. However, the un registered or slum landlord, tenants with out rental/lease agreements or lets be frank tenants with limited rights for whatever reason is the area that needs to be addressed the most.

 

[Spazz]

Just had an email from the Welsh Minister of Housing

They are going to review the law in regards to EICRs (and possibly RCDs) but not until we are out of the rescission.

This makes no sense at all! Landlords are in the trade that always have a demand for their services


This is the classic rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer

 

[Octopus]

This is the classic rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer

I have to disagree with you.

Implementing ill thought out mandatory testing and improvments on to the rental sector will add costs for landlords who WILL pass on the costs to the tenents.

Delaying and thinking this through more is a good thing IMHO.

 

[Spazz]

I think that comment was not the best!

What I am trying to say is that yes putting mandatory I&T will add to the rent.

What I can see them doing is 5/10 years mandatory and advise every change.

This will keep the costs down for the landlord (£160 on average per test - over 5 years = £32, per month = £2.67

This is such a small amount

Yes if they change tenants every year this would cost alot - even more on 6 month changes

 

[oldtimer]

Look at it this way people want regulation but dont want to pay and landlords want minimum regulation and dont want to pay. Now in case you have not noticed we are in the middle of a dire economic downturn so the politicians are being pragmatic by not wantingto burden business with what they see as extra cost that will be pased on to the tenant. Plus someone will say well there has been rental properties for hundreds of years and we have enough regulations fo the time being so whats the problem well lets look at the politician we have had parliment for about 500 years so why can we not get things sorted well thats easy as they were building the Scottish Parliment they said it would cost £45 million it actually cost £450 plus my old mum said at the time nothing will happen its just a talking shop because thats what politicians do they talk it to death to show they are doing something because they cannot be seen to do nothing a bit like this issue because as I have said before if we had 20 deaths a week through bad electrics in rental properties then yes the laws/regulations would be changed but that is not the case hence why we will be kicking this can down the road for a few more years yet and ill be muddling through.

Also as I have highlighted before we as electrician have put up with a lot of changes in the last year at our cost BGB On Site Guide,EICR,ISI&TEE(PAT) change in certification, change in C&G because we do not have representation to say hold on these guys are not cash cows stop hitting them in this current climate with all these extra costs. It the same for landlords except they do have representation and are not afraid to use it so I think you will find that instead of new regulations there will be some advisory comments added to the existing regulations

 

[kbl123]

it is understandable to think that mandatory testing of rental properties will increase potential rents and the policy of implementation does need to be thought out. But it must not have any grey areas so as to avoid any rental/lease property from avoiding compulsory T&I, which will no doubt need to be thought through as Murdoch quite rightly points out.
As with anything that comes with new policies or regulations the question of cost/benefit and to whom will be explored and deliberated and probably assumed that its just another money making scheme. However, my point in making it mandatory is not to penalise the responsible but to regulate the so called slum landlords in to ensuring a safe and satisfactory installation.

 

[Octopus]

If and only if it became mandatory the average cost for a EICR would not be £160.00

It woul be like PAT testing, a sticker operation and nothing else.