Ah so they have confirmed that someone else has put their company details on the report without their knowledge?
Yes.
This seems very weird and I can't see why they would do it.
You will after you've digested the back story! Here goes ....
The client hired a builder to construct a purpose-built industrial unit by way of a turnkey project arrangement. The builder selected the electrician. The electrician proves himself to be unreliable and goes AWOL on several occasions. It turns out that the erratic electrician has a serious addiction to Colombian marching powder. The client experiences numerous delays due as a consequence. To add to the client's woes, Building Control have been on site on several occasions and are not happy with several aspects of the project. Further delays ensue.
The Client was planning to move in to the premises back in February, but as of yet is still unable to do so due to Building Control refusing to sign-off on the building warrant because of issues with the certification of the electrical installation. This is the point where things become interesting.
Up here in Scotland, there are three ways of signing-off electrical work that is subject to a building warrant:
1. By using a Scottish Buildings Standards Approved Certifier. The certifier must be a member of SELECT or NICEIC. In this instance, when a building warrant is applied for and the applicant states that they are going to use an approved certifier of construction, the certifier simply downloads a certificate of construction from the Scottish Buildings Standards website, completes it and sends it back to SBS. LA Building Control check the validity of the certificate and sign-off on the work.
2. When the applicant is not using a Scottish Buildings Standards Approved Certifier, building standards will ask for a Minor Works Certificate or an EIC, or even an EICR that has been completed by a SELECT or an NICEIC member.
3. The third option is Reasonable Enquiry. This is the only option available when the person who carried-out the work is not a Scottish Buildings Standards Approved Certifier or a member of SELECT or NICEIC. A copy of the electrician's SJIB grade card must be submitted along with a Minor Works Certificate or an EIC and a copy of the calibration certificate for the test equipment used.
As it happens, the electrician who did the wiring is not registered with SELECT or NICEIC nor does he possess a current SJIB grading card. He therefore cannot sign-off on his work. It is at this point when the client, who is now pulling his hair out and is understandably feeling very stressed, contacts me for advice. I advise him accordingly. The client issues the builder with an ultimatum and demands that certification is provided no later than the end of July otherwise he will withhold final payment. The builder gets back to the client a few days later and promises that he will have the job signed-off before the deadline. The builder then gets the original electrician back on site. He brings with him a pal who is subsequently discovered to be a former employee of the company whose name appears on the EICR. An EICR is produced and given to the builder who then passes the report to the client. The client sends the report over to me for analysis.
I had serious misgivings about this report even before I had looked at it. My first impressions were that it was a forgery. It appeared to have been scanned then saved as a PDF file. My suspicions were heightened when I noticed that the age of this brand-new installation was stated to be 25 years. I was somewhat alarmed to note that although the stated PFC is given as 11.5 kA, the MCBs are listed as having a breaking capacity of 6kA. I wouldn't like to be standing in the vicinity of any of those breakers should they ever rupture. Since the installation is quite literally right next door to a sub-station, the stated earth loop impedance of 0.02 ohms will almost certainly be correct.
Then there is the issue of no RCD protection for any of the sockets in the main part of the premises. Although the boxes for RCD test button functionality have been ticked, no trip times have been recorded. It is therefore highly unlikely that RCD protection is present. Regulation 411.3.3 permits the omission of RCD protection in non-domestic premises so long as a documented risk assessment has been carried-out to determine that RCD protection is unnecessary. No risk assessment has been carried-out.
Having discussed these issues with client, he decided to contact the company whose name appears on the report. The company confirmed that the serial number listed on the report relates to a different job! They also confirmed that the tester whose name appears on the report is no longer employed there. One need not be a seasoned detective to figure-out what has happened here.
The client has leant on the builder and threatened to withhold final payment. The builder has in turn most likely leant on the electrician who did the work and told him he isn't getting paid until the job is certified. Unable to sign-off himself, the desperate electrician enlists the help of a pal who uses an existing EICR that was carried-out by his former employer and forges the report, erasing the original data and substituting it with data for the new installation. One has to wonder if the entire schedule of tests has been fabricated.
My understanding is that Building Control will accept an EICR from a SELECT or NICEIC member. I will therefore be carrying-out a very thorough EICR. No stone will be left unturned. I've agreed a deal with the client and he is happy to pay me on a time and materials basis. If the photo he sent me is indicative of the overall condition of this brand-new installation, then I dread to think what other defects I will uncover.
Are TES going to pursue the forgers?
I don't know. I sure hope so. I have advised the client to take the matter up with Trading Standards regardless. The charlatans and rogue electricians who bring our trade into disrepute need to be identified and held to account for their actions.
