UK Pricing

[Dustydazzler]

£1500 all in

 

[bigspark17]

£1350+vat. @ £50p/point. I wouldnt put fused spurs for appliances just socket in adjacent cupboards, id also be wiring a heat alarm in 3core back to the cu.

 

[Midwest]

A DP switch above the worktop, might be useful to some clients. Agree with the socket in an adjacent cupboard. Its devils work putting them behind the appliance.

 

[Dustydazzler]

A DP switch above the worktop, might be useful to some clients. Agree with the socket in an adjacent cupboard. Its devils work putting them behind the appliance.

most cookers / hobs generally have a connection behind the appliance...

 

[pc1966]

Having an accessible isolation switch for kitchen white goods is in the Scottish building regs and really ought to be in them for England & Wales as well. So probably DP switch above the counter and unswitched 13A socket behind the appliance, etc.

 

[richy3333]

@pc1966 Where we lead in Scotlan, England the follows ?

 

[nicebutdim]

Having an accessible isolation switch for kitchen white goods is in the Scottish building regs and really ought to be in them for England & Wales as well. So probably DP switch above the counter and unswitched 13A socket behind the appliance, etc.

I'd be curious to know if this is also a requirement in NI as I've never seen a socket fitted inside a cupboard.

 

[Dartlec]

I quoted £1250 all in, based in the South East

I've approached building control and they want huge sums of money

For a consumer unit £350, they have nothing set up and just sub it out themselves

I am joining NICEIC, but I need to present some work to them which needs to be notified.
I have NVQ Level 3 and all the various elements to achieve that. C & G 2391 inspection and testing, 18th Edition exam booked in for next month as I'm currently on 17th. I even have C Course, which I wish I never wasted two years of my life doing because no-one seems to recognise that qualification these days. Been out of the trade on paye for some time and haven't need to keep my qualifications up to date, until now

Seems like I got lucky, or maybe things have changed - When I joined Part P was still new - and they carried out my initial inspection on a consumer unit change at my father's house, then I notified it once I'd passed!

Don't suppose there is any other building Regs notification on this job (eg for extension or a beam going in)? If I remember correctly it used to be that if you paid their building regs fee for any work then in theory that should also cover the cost of them certifying electrical work, though in practise they often refused and there wasn't much you could do about it to force them.

That may be out of date, as it was a long time ago that I saw it come up.

For what it's worth, that price sounds perfectly reasonable for the South East - i doubt he'd find anyone cheaper who would actually notify it. That many downlights alone could cause no end of trouble if the ceilings not down and joists are all over the place as is often the case....

 

[Taylortwocities]

If I remember correctly it used to be that if you paid their building regs fee for any work then in theory that should also cover the cost of them certifying electrical work, though in practise they often refused and there wasn't much you could do about it to force them.

Think that is still the way, but it’s still expected for the installing electrician to be competent and capable of testing and certifying the whole to BS7671. They really, really want Building Regs compliance (notifications) to be done electronically through a scam.
I’ve not met a council-employed electrician for a
l o n g
Time who certifies a ‘DIY’ installation.

 

[Dartlec]

Think that is still the way, but it’s still expected for the installing electrician to be competent and capable of testing and certifying the whole to BS7671. They really, really want Building Regs compliance (notifications) to be done electronically through a scam.
I’ve not met a council-employed electrician for a
l o n g
Time who certifies a ‘DIY’ installation.

If I recall correctly there was a memo from the relevant department confirming that BC should cover the testing of electrical installation at their own cost - but I think it was so long ago it was a Labour Government!

They do love that word "competent" though, even when it's so poorly defined overall...
[automerge]1595622172[/automerge]

Eek , thats not very good reading.

These bodies do seem to be on a license to print money , for what seems very little , but what choice do sparkys have if they want to work legitimately. This was one of the factors of me closing my business previously.

I was also looking at Elecsa , but they seem to just be a sister company of NICEIC , even the enquiry phone number puts you through to the same line.

I was previously with NAPIT , but I have phoned them twice and no one has bothered to return my initial enquiry calls. I gave up after 3 attempts. My thought were if this is how they operate , what chance do I have of them offering assistance if I need it in the future

South East here too, and have to say that the guy they usually send to do my assessment has been very good - very experienced, knowledgeable, but happy to have a discussion if you know what you're talking about and definitely on the supportive side and not looking to catch you out.

He is not employed by them directly though and might do all the schemes for all I know.

Not that I've got anything else from the NICEIC over the years apart from bills, but their website usually works and it's the one people have heard of, so not seen any reason to change.

Last time I checked, the prices for most of the schemes were all so similar that it was obvious they'd all decided what the market rate was, rather than work it out based on their costs! <cynic mode>

 

[Craighrvy]

Seems like I got lucky, or maybe things have changed - When I joined Part P was still new - and they carried out my initial inspection on a consumer unit change at my father's house, then I notified it once I'd passed!

Don't suppose there is any other building Regs notification on this job (eg for extension or a beam going in)? If I remember correctly it used to be that if you paid their building regs fee for any work then in theory that should also cover the cost of them certifying electrical work, though in practise they often refused and there wasn't much you could do about it to force them.

That may be out of date, as it was a long time ago that I saw it come up.

For what it's worth, that price sounds perfectly reasonable for the South East - i doubt he'd find anyone cheaper who would actually notify it. That many downlights alone could cause no end of trouble if the ceilings not down and joists are all over the place as is often the case....

I had a similar experience when I signed up with Napit, but again that was when part p was new. Guy came for a look at my test gear, certs. Then we went to a job I'd done for my mates sister, not notified consumer unit and additional socket. Signed it off there and then. Guess they have to be a bit stricter but from what I have been reading, you don't have to have level 3 to get part p which is ridiculous
[automerge]1595622823[/automerge]

If I recall correctly there was a memo from the relevant department confirming that BC should cover the testing of electrical installation at their own cost - but I think it was so long ago it was a Labour Government!

They do love that word "competent" though, even when it's so poorly defined overall...
[automerge]1595622172[/automerge]


South East here too, and have to say that the guy they usually send to do my assessment has been very good - very experienced, knowledgeable, but happy to have a discussion if you know what you're talking about and definitely on the supportive side and not looking to catch you out.

He is not employed by them directly though and might do all the schemes for all I know.

Not that I've got anything else from the NICEIC over the years apart from bills, but their website usually works and it's the one people have heard of, so not seen any reason to change.

Last time I checked, the prices for most of the schemes were all so similar that it was obvious they'd all decided what the market rate was, rather than work it out based on their costs! <cynic mode>

If you read the reviews, it's all customers complaining about niceic registered wannabee sparks who have lashed it up, and the niceic have failed to follow up on it, or made good on their platinum promise to pay a proper sparks to put it right. Really just seems to be a money spinner for them, cowboys who undercut decent sparks still get the jobs and undercut the guys who do a decent job, and seem to get away with it. Has anyone actually heard of someone getting prosecuted for mot notifying their work?

 

[Midwest]

@pc1966 Where we lead in Scotlan, England the follows ?

Obviously we are not greater than you.

 

[Dartlec]

Has anyone actually heard of someone getting prosecuted for mot notifying their work?

Technically isn't the offence committed by the homeowner or landlord though? In which case I imagine it's not great PR to prosecute individual homeowners.

There have been a few electricians prosecuted by Trading Standards I've seen, but not specifically under Part P - and god knows how bad they must be to get to that stage!

 

[Midwest]

Technically isn't the offence committed by the homeowner or landlord though? In which case I imagine it's not great PR to prosecute individual homeowners.

There have been a few electricians prosecuted by Trading Standards I've seen, but not specifically under Part P - and god knows how bad they must be to get to that stage!

Whilst the home owner is responsible to ensure work is compliant, and can forced to remove or rectify the works, or pay for the rectification, prosecution would normally be taken on the persons carry out the work Planning Portal

I’ve never read of a prosecution of failure to notify electrical works, but have had several customers asking for copies of certificates and one asking about a compliance certificate, when they have been selling their properties. Any notifiable works not registered, may well be revealed during local land search. Home owner is also required to sign a document when selling, to confirm (amongst other things) if any electrical work has been carried out since 2005.

 

[Craighrvy]

Whilst the home owner is responsible to ensure work is compliant, and can forced to remove or rectify the works, or pay for the rectification, prosecution would normally be taken on the persons carry out the work Planning Portal

I’ve never read of a prosecution of failure to notify electrical works, but have had several customers asking for copies of certificates and one asking about a compliance certificate, when they have been selling their properties. Any notifiable works not registered, may well be revealed during local land search. Home owner is also required to sign a document when selling, to confirm (amongst other things) if any electrical work has been carried out since 2005.

Pretty sure a land search will only show up external service moves, water mains, drain etc. Definitely If the work isn't notified, it won't show on any searches.
When you sell a house the questions about electrical alterations is just a tick box, yes or no and I imagine DIY Joe is just going to tick the "no" box. Surveyors just look at the fuse board and guess the age/condition from that, they don't even take the cover off.

 

[Midwest]

Pretty sure a land search will only show up external service moves, water mains, drain etc. Definitely If the work isn't notified, it won't show on any searches.
When you sell a house the questions about electrical alterations is just a tick box, yes or no and I imagine DIY Joe is just going to tick the "no" box. Surveyors just look at the fuse board and guess the age/condition from that, they don't even take the cover off.

If the property has any work done on it, such as a CU change, and it has been notified, it will be registered as such on the LBC website, some LBC web sites are better than others.

If the change hasn’t been notified, then the obvious presence of a new CU, might be an issue for a prospective buyer.

Having recently sold a property, the ‘tick box’ document, is slightly more in depth than that, and amongst other things requires necessary certification and compliance certificate for various works, including electrical work.

The vendor then has to sign the form, and declare honest disclosure.
Of course you can lie, but you are signing a legally binding document.

 

[Craighrvy]

If the property has any work done on it, such as a CU change, and it has been notified, it will be registered as such on the LBC website, some LBC web sites are better than others.

If the change hasn’t been notified, then the obvious presence of a new CU, might be an issue for a prospective buyer.

Having recently sold a property, the ‘tick box’ document, is slightly more in depth than that, and amongst other things requires necessary certification and compliance certificate for various works, including electrical work.

The vendor then has to sign the form, and declare honest disclosure.
Of course you can lie, but you are signing a legally binding document.

That's the thing though, people just lie and face no legal repercussions. Once the solicitor has their sale they don't want anymore involvement. Average Joe isn't going to know if a fuse board has been replaced recently or not. These things only come to light if there are problems later on. Again, how many people, tradesman or diyers have you heard of who have faced legal action for lying about undeclared works? If it was to be discovered or declared before the sale, it would just be used as an opportunity to lower the sale price. They won't ever go after the person who fitted it. I say they, who would be responsible ? Building control wouldn't be interested at all I imagine, niceic don't seem to follow up on their contractors that do bad jobs either by the sound of it

 

[Dartlec]

That's the thing though, people just lie and face no legal repercussions. Once the solicitor has their sale they don't want anymore involvement. Average Joe isn't going to know if a fuse board has been replaced recently or not. These things only come to light if there are problems later on. Again, how many people, tradesman or diyers have you heard of who have faced legal action for lying about undeclared works? If it was to be discovered or declared before the sale, it would just be used as an opportunity to lower the sale price. They won't ever go after the person who fitted it. I say they, who would be responsible ? Building control wouldn't be interested at all I imagine, niceic don't seem to follow up on their contractors that do bad jobs either by the sound of it

The reason I initally moved into electrics back in 2005ish was not just Part P, but the expectation that Home Information Packs would include an electrical test of a property so that any potential buyers would be aware of the state of the electrics.

Of course that didn't happen, possibly because of the lobbying from Estate Agents who thought their bloated fees might be dented.

Had it happened, and similar weight been put on it as an equivalent bulding survey, then maybe we might be in a much better place now. Surveyors certainly do face repercussions if they miss something serious.

Arguably, doing that 10 years ago would probably have added more to home safety than forcing all metal consumer units or trying to push AFDDs
[automerge]1595685308[/automerge]

If the property has any work done on it, such as a CU change, and it has been notified, it will be registered as such on the LBC website, some LBC web sites are better than others.

If the change hasn’t been notified, then the obvious presence of a new CU, might be an issue for a prospective buyer.

Having recently sold a property, the ‘tick box’ document, is slightly more in depth than that, and amongst other things requires necessary certification and compliance certificate for various works, including electrical work.

The vendor then has to sign the form, and declare honest disclosure.
Of course you can lie, but you are signing a legally binding document.

It still can't legally require you to produce an electrical certificate though, can it? I've had some clients ring to say they've been told they need a certificate to complete a sale which I didn't think was the case. (not for work I've done, but just generally to sell a house I mean)

If there is notified Part P work then there should be a corresponding electrical certificate of course, but outside of that is there a legal requirement to produce anything before a sale can be completed?

Obviously it might be for the buyer to exercise caution or drop the price to reflect any possible risk, just like with anything else - but EICRs for private properties are not a legal requirement as we know.

 

[Midwest]

As with any statutory offence, there are various considerations to be taken into account before a prosecution is considered. LBC are responsible for such action, but in most cases I suspect, they would seek to get things rectified. I have read of some electrical companies founding themselves in court for not following due process, but they are few & far between, I admit. I suspect only cases which were serious or persistent, would attract prosecution.

If you tell lies when completing a legal document, then that would be for the buyer to decided to continue with the agreement & purchase (if it was found out). And of course, the lack of certification etc, could & should be reflected in the negotiation of the agreed price, the new owner might have to incur additional costs to rectify.

If the owner is honest, and says they have had works carried out, which were not compliant and or do not have the appropriate documentation, then that is for the purchaser to decide whether to proceed of not. They might wish to consider, how that would be declared in obtaining property insurance.

 

[Dartlec]

If the owner is honest, and says they have had works carried out, which were not compliant and or do not have the appropriate documentation, then that is for the purchaser to decide whether to proceed of not. They might wish to consider, how that would be declared in obtaining property insurance.

not to derail the thread completely, but insurance is a whole different bag of worms. My guess is that most of them don't specify frequency of inspection or anything, but may end up with some reference to the householder maintaining it as 'safe' which could be argued happily over in court for days no doubt.