Could I ask if you could help explain the comments re a Domestic ElCR report that has come back unsatisfactory please

[kirstie Archer]

Background: I have a ex council 1st floor flat that I bought, I moved in to care for my disabled mum and so rented the flat as I could not do enough hours work and care.

I was told I am a kind landlord and when asked to do things I will jump immediately as I would not like my tenant to have a problem. The tenant was found by an agent who is initially the main point of contact for medical reasons on my part. However, after a bad expereince of a not so good professional suggested by them. I have used my preferred sparky and plumber and I book them to do the certificates and checks and services. However, my lovely sparky retired 2 years ago and is NOT NIC registered anymore.

I was sent a letter back in March stating the new laws means I needed an EICR satisfactory report done on the flat ASAP as I am renting my flat out. (Then COVID hit)

Anyway, I finally booked a company online 'Landlord Certificates' to do the test and today I have received a very technical report 8 pages long with two other booklets with codes in that I am beside myself with worry over and do not understand but they have pointed out a C2 which means danger and said because of that even the C3's must be put right by law.

Please please could anyone help me to explain what these mean as I truly do not fully understand them so I know what the issue is and then what I need to do as in work (of course a Sparky). I would also be grateful for a guide price to as I think I may need to go to get a loan.

On the reports it has 4 items unsatisfactory:

1. 4.11a The consumer unit has no circuits chart - C3 (Consumer Unit)
2. 5.11 C The consumer unit has no RCD for additional protection for cables installed in walls and partition with a depth less than 50mm. - C3 (Consumer Unit)
3. 8.4 Absence of supplementary bonding where required in a location containing a bath or shower, where all final circuits of the location comply with the requirements of Regulation 4.11 3.2 for automatic disconnection and all final circuits of the location have additional protection by means of a 30mA RCD and all extraneous-conductive parts of the loca C2 (Bathroom)
4. The consumer unit is made from combustible material does not comply with the 18th edition of the wiring regulations - C3 (Consumer Unit)

I know my consumer unit is made of the cream coloured plastic.
The bathroom when it was installed 4 years ago, they put 6mm bonding in as I emailed to check with my retired sparky.

He did say the panels can be removed to see pipes, it just needs to be unscrewed and the bath to be careful so they do not crack the panel on the bath. However, he did advise as he is no longer in the game to get advice from a Electrical forum in the first instance as people will explain it in different ways which might make it easier to understand. (He also said to be careful that there are lots doing this 'certificate' and ripping you off, which has of course worried me even more in my situation.

I am beside myself, since renting I have not raised the rent, 4 years, I am the cheapest in my estate but I know that my tenant is a kind man and does a manual job and I did not rent my flat to profit it was so the flat pays for itself as in the mortgage and bills and had a person living in it rather than empty and at risk. However these last two years there has been more and more certificates I am being told must be done yearly which is quite expensive.

To add insult to injury I was told only yesterday I am being laid off and now have that, which looking on here under consumer units, there was a lot of people talking about what they charge and some saying I charge £45 per hour because they can afford it and commenting on what people are paid e.g. newspaper boy £9.00. Consumer units being £200 to buy but charging £1,000. I am beside myself honestly.

It is not just young people who struggle to make a living, as a carer we get £9.59p per hour and have to do long days, very manual intensive and hard providing care for elderly, vulerable, frail, ill, some beat you black and blue as they do not realise you are trying to help, we do courses and have qualifications for medication/first aid/life saving skills as well as others, I wish the job was appreciated and paid better but sadly it is not and not appreciated and for most until you need a carer for a relative you do not think of them as educated and hard working.

Sorry everyone, you can probably tell I am very emotional and worried and upset by it.

 

[magnoliafan89]

Who on earth tells someone that as it has c2s this will also mean the c3s need doing by law also???
Supp. Bonding being added is as someone else said an hours work at best.

 

[Strima]

Kirstie, if possible could you post up the report so we can take a look?

It would need to have any names, addresses, company details etc blanked out.

C3 means improvement is recommended but would still result in a satisfactory report if no C2 or C1 conditions exist, therefore these don't technically need sorting. To state they have to be put right by law is nonsense and scaremongering.

C2 means potentially dangerous and will need rectifying.

C1 means danger present and will need rectifying.

The problem with the recent changes is a lot of companies are jumping on the band wagon and quoting ridiculously low prices to carry out testing. They will then give an unsatisfactory report to make money on the remedial works. Morally corrupt.

Even if the inspector rectifies all the faults the report will remain unsatisfactory. Any certificates for the rectification works would then show that the work has been completed, there is no requirement to issue a new report.

In five years time the next inspector would look at old reports and certificates to see what faults were present and if they were rectified. They would also be able to tell if any dangerous conditions have reoccurred through trends, such as shower switches overheating for example. If all they see is satisfactory reports over the years then the installation must be perfect and nothing ever goes wrong.

I would advise speaking to your retired electrician as they must know a trusted trader in your area.

 

[radiohead]

the idea is rcd protection not there covering the bathroom then any thing will require bonding a protentional where mrs gibbons decides to change a bulb or fitting standing in the sink and foot touching the taps .

RCD protection is required to all final circuits in a bathroom, the fact that SB is or is not installed is irrelevant, it still requires additional protection and if that is not present it should have been coded.

If additional protection is present then SB is unlikely to be required.
If additional protection is not present then that should have been coded.

As I read it the report recommends the installation of SB, so presumably additional protection is not present. Even if SB is installed lack of additional protection should still get a code 3, and the report apparently says it is a legal requirement to rectify code 3's!

The correct way to rectify this based on the report recommendations is not to install SB, but to provide additional protection to bathroom final circuits.

Item 3 in the report does not make any sense.

 

[davesparks]

C3 means improvement is recommended but would still result in a satisfactory report if no C2 or C1 conditions exist,

Can, not will. A report with only C3 items can be given an overall assessment of satisfactory, but nothing prevents it being given an overall assessment of unsatisfactory.

 

[Timbo]

Boy, oh boy.

What is an Electrical Certificate ? | Landlord Certificates

Find out why every landlord in the UK should have an electrical certificate or EICR.

www.landlord-certificates.co.uk

Interesting read. Put the wind up a lot of people, that.

 

[ChipFanDave]

Boy, oh boy.

What is an Electrical Certificate ? | Landlord Certificates

Find out why every landlord in the UK should have an electrical certificate or EICR.

www.landlord-certificates.co.uk

Interesting read. Put the wind up a lot of people, that.

They offer EICR for £99 and also tout there inspectors as "engineers", another company that likes to scare money out of people.

 

[Grant1987]

Boy, oh boy.

What is an Electrical Certificate ? | Landlord Certificates

Find out why every landlord in the UK should have an electrical certificate or EICR.

www.landlord-certificates.co.uk

Interesting read. Put the wind up a lot of people, that.

Just read that. It makes me feel sick reading that ?
[automerge]1593650272[/automerge]

Just read that. It makes me feel sick reading that ?

Although I’m a t**t for consumer units And that’s my hobby ? reading that even makes me feel angry.

 

[radiohead]

Am I missing something here? Having just had a quick read through that paper I cant see a great deal of scaremongering, it simply states the reasons for an EICR and what and EICR is designed to identify. Neither can I see any reference to £99??

 

[Timbo]

Am I missing something here? Having just had a quick read through that paper I cant see a great deal of scaremongering, it simply states the reasons for an EICR and what and EICR is designed to identify. Neither can I see any reference to £99??

Try this:

Gas Safety Certificate £30 | Electrical Certificate £99

Fast, quality service at a low price. Electrical Certificate £99, Gas Certificate from £30, EPC £45 and PAT Testing £45. All prices include VAT

www.landlord-certificates.co.uk

 

[DPG]

It said there was a fresh reply to this thread, but I can't see one

 

[littlespark]

It said there was a fresh reply to this thread, but I can't see one

Maybe been deleted afterwards…. After noticing it’s 3 years old now.

 

[oscar21]

As its not an active topic to derail I want to ask a question. Even if there is no reason for an RCD at the time, upstairs flat, no requirement for buried cables at the time etc then it should be a C3 - improvement recommended. But I'm sure I've read somewhere that if its a rental flat then the tenant would just assume there is an RCD present and it will save their life when they do something stupid therefore a lack of RCD in a rental should be a C2 no matter what the circumstances.

A bit like mains smoke alarms in rentals should have lithium batteries when there is a credit meter because the tenant is more likely to spend money on cigs and booze instead of electric. I think they are stating that people that rent are a bit thick.

 

[DPG]

As its not an active topic to derail I want to ask a question. Even if there is no reason for an RCD at the time, upstairs flat, no requirement for buried cables at the time etc then it should be a C3 - improvement recommended. But I'm sure I've read somewhere that if its a rental flat then the tenant would just assume there is an RCD present and it will save their life when they do something stupid therefore a lack of RCD in a rental should be a C2 no matter what the circumstances.

A bit like mains smoke alarms in rentals should have lithium batteries when there is a credit meter because the tenant is more likely to spend money on cigs and booze instead of electric. I think they are stating that people that rent are a bit thick.

I've never seen a reg stating that a different code should be applied depending on whether the person pays rent or mortgage.

 

[davesparks]

But I'm sure I've read somewhere that if its a rental flat then the tenant would just assume there is an RCD present and it will save their life when they do something stupid therefore a lack of RCD in a rental should be a C2 no matter what the circumstances.

This doesn't pass a common sense test, the average person has no clue what an RCD is or does so the idea that tenants are going to assume an RCD is there to save them makes no sense.

I'm sure I've read somewhere that the earth is flat and Elvis is still alive, doesn't make it true or even believeable.

 

[Risteard]

I've never seen a reg stating that a different code should be applied depending on whether the person pays rent or mortgage.

No, but in fairness if there is a perceived greater risk then the assessment of it might be different. Not sure that I'd agree in the circumstances outlined though.