compulsory E.I.C's for domestic properties?

[MerlinGremlin]

Good afternoon all hope all is well, just a quick question to everyone and to get some feedback. How many agree that all domestic properties should have to have a 20% test done each year to comply with building insurance and make homes much safer? All thoughts welcome please gents and ladies!

 

[MerlinGremlin]

Part P is a waste of time and an insult to sparks as a electrical trainee or a kitchen fitter can issue a cert, the amount of jobs I've been asked to look at due to issues and problems but been signed off. The work I have seen is so sub standard but I have to inform the local authority to come and check my work and have it signed off even though I've been sparking for 12 years.

 

[driverman]

Dazza 1981 I've not given any advice the only reason I brought it up is because a friend of mine is in insurance and he was telling me they didn't pay out on a claim because the electrical install was below standards and no test certs etc could be provided to prove they were okay! So I was asking the question what people thought about it, what might become compulsory in the very near future

That insurance loop hole has been used many times before years ago, well before all this part P was introduced. It's nothing new.

 

[gutterball]

it will be like the report that you get now. the inspector stands in the garden looks up at the roof ticks box, that's ok . looks at the new switches and sockets the home owner has fitted to freshen the place up before it's sold another tick. lots of exclusions as they can't see things.

 

[Zebra Stripe]

Wondered how long it would take for you to jump on the band wagon.

A hint of a quick buck and here you are.

Thats a little unfair Tony. Your making me sound like someone that does electrical work for a living and not the charitable organisation that I am. Oh, hang on your right, naughty dirty me, I must stop charging for the work I do, especially those quick bucks… I feel soooo ashamed:laugh3:

 

[UNG]

might be a good idea in principal. hypothetically, an genuine EICR every 5 years costing , say, £250, with the insurance companies giving a £50/annum discount on seeing a copy of the report. Sparks earn money, the cost is recovered by the home owner through the reduced premium. everyone's a winner.

I'm sure you'll wake up and snap out of that dream soon insurance companies have never lived in this hypothetical ideal world discounting you talk of

We know of one case now but how many claims are refused because of a substandard electrical installation and more to the point one that causes the policy holder to claim

Ung I'm cards in with a company so it wouldn't interest me if an insurance company tried tapping me up I wouldn't entertain it, with gas you have the chance to smell it, you have carbon monoxide alarms and you can only work on it if your gas registered! With electricity you can't smell it, see it or fit alarms to warn you its present and dangerous and then the next thing you know you've been struck by the tail of the devil!

Just read my post I meant insurance companies signing up householders to an inspection scheme not yourself. With regard to the rest of your post are you trying to teach me to suck eggs everything we all do carries a risk does what you and your mate propose actually reduce the risk rather than an annual 20% EICR I suggest all electrical installations are brought up to 18th edition regs ( And before the corrections flood in I know what I have said ) because it'll be safer than what we currently have or how about households having to have all appliances fixed and portable checked every year where will all the pie in the sky ideas end. A while ago someone was banging a drum similar to yours i'd give before you waste to much energy

 

[UNG]

I understand there will be costs incurred by the homeowners or landlords but surely as sparks we should all be thinking along the line of raising standards in domestic properties, it would be hard to police and make sure all circuits tested etc if it saves lives then I'm all for it, or even if it became compulsory to have one done before you can sell your house? Or every 10 years just to check everything is okay? Some of the houses I've worked in over the years have been death traps due to people adding things on and not knowing what there doing, this could prevent someone being killed hopefully.

How can we raise standards when the government and the parasitic schemes are lowering them faster than a -----'s Knickers

Part P ring any bells?

Why is everyone hell bent on domestic properties?

What about commercial and industrial, why weren't these mentioned by the OP?

Because that is all they know and the market is saturated and new revenue streams are needed

Before the sale of a house is a great idea, rather than find out what a heap or crud you have bought after the sale. Prospective buyers could skip straight to the observations page, but as regards 20% every year - no way.

The average man in the street does not understand an EICR in most cases the issue of a cert suggests to most that the installation is ok unless it's put in very succinct terms in big letters that the installation is screwed it will not be understood

Part P is a waste of time and an insult to sparks as a electrical trainee or a kitchen fitter can issue a cert, the amount of jobs I've been asked to look at due to issues and problems but been signed off. The work I have seen is so sub standard but I have to inform the local authority to come and check my work and have it signed off even though I've been sparking for 12 years.

This problem lies in two places one with the previous government and their perceived lack of skilled labour the result is a massive increase in very semi skilled labour trained through the quick course system and then accredited as being competent and two the customer wanting the job done as cheaply as possible which results in corners being cut

 

[UNG]

Just looked on the ONS website in 2012 there were 26.4 million households in the UK if everyone had a 20% EICR each year the electrical industry would be swamped

 

[stevethesparks]

How can we raise standards when the government and the parasitic schemes are lowering them faster than a -----'s Knickers

lol....

 

[Deleted member 26818]

To start with, an EIC where only 20% of circuits are tested! would not be worth the paper it is written on.
Secondly, to suggest that home owners must have electrical work done to their homes, in order for an EIC to be produced each year is ridiculous.

Perhaps suggesting that an EICR should be conducted annually might be a better idea?
However the main problem with that, is cost.

With Gas Safe/Corgi, there are a few simple tests conducted which are the same for any and all installations, irrespective of size or complexity.

The same would not apply with an electrical installation.

 

[Gavin A]

very dangerous step to start making something like this mandatory for owner occupier homes IMO - I'm firmly of the opinion that the less the government has to say about what people do in their own homes the better.

I also can't help thinking that this could well cause more problems than it solves, as the pressure for cheap EICRs would inevitably result in more chance of cables being left not tightened up / not put back in at all in the boards after a test, which is most dangerous than a system that's already been signed off as being safe on installation.

EICRs don't pick up on high resistance joints anyway, and these are the most likely cause of fires IMO.

If an insurance company wants to offer cheaper rates with a regular electrical inspection report, then that's a different matter, but in the absense of this, then my assumption would be that there's little merit in it, as the insurance industry are no slouches when it comes to picking up on things that would save them money by improving on safety.

 

[Guest77]

I think it would actually be dangerous, disconnecting circuits every year continously year after year to test them could actually weaken the circuit breaker terminals and cause a fire lol.

 

[aesmith]

I understand that a cost would come into it but can you put a price on safety?

Of course you can. Or are you saying you'd be willing to pay any price no matter how high, and no matter how small the possible safety benefit?

 

[DPG]

I think it would actually be dangerous, disconnecting circuits every year continously year after year to test them could actually weaken the circuit breaker terminals and cause a fire lol.

And if socket outlets are unscrewed and then refitted there will be more metal-fatigue failures of the twin and earth. Specially if someone has nicked into the copper when it was stripped. Daz

 

[Spoon]

I understand that a cost would come into it but can you put a price on safety?

I never trust anyone who comes out with comments like this...

 

[gazj82]

As for the MOT analogy, a car weighs a ton travels 40 mph through town centre meters away from pedestrians. Your house doesn't create anywhere near the amount of hazards that your car does.