Dodgy EICR (Consumer)

[Vortigern]

To be fair to NICEIC, of whom I have no liking, they inspect a qualified supervisor and inspect the company rather than the individuals in the company. There is no doubt in this scenario a rogue or two will get into the system and get away (for a certain time) with mayhem. As @Wilko says this is not the "norm" I think NICEIC have the right idea in making sure the work is, in the end, safe and compliant. No doubt the firm you had working for you will send someone who knows what they are doing. Optimistic I know but generally speaking I think I can safely say the many electricians on here would never do such work. It is as always a minority that spoils it and tars the whole lot. Try not to let this happen. I can see the steam coming out of your vents from here, and quite rightly. In the case of negligence there are three hurdles to jump. One, Is there a duty of care, Two, was that care breached, Three, did harm result from it? Clearly there is a duty, and it was breached. The "harm" arising is loss of money and potential danger in an electrical situation. The remedy? Fix the poor work. You have been offered a means of addressing this and have refused to take it. If you will not take the necessary steps to mitigating your losses then you have no recourse to law in the matter.

 

[JH4Jill]

I'd love to hear the rest of the story. Ditto above. Like so many services, you never know what you are going to get. You could hire a lawyer who is pants/brilliant. Same qualificiations/experience but just not the same intelligence and honesty. I think the key factor is a person who is diligent and conscientious. Perhaps the way forward is to make it clear from the start, you will not be using the same electrician for remedial work, you will be using some other firm/electrician to put right any defects found. This is a growing trend for LLs to separate the two functions. Obviously there is a conflict of interests. Same with an MOT, again you need an honest and conscientious mechanic to ensure you will not be charged for unnecessary work.

I'd love to hear the rest of the story. Ditto above. Like so many services, you never know what you are going to get. You could hire a lawyer who is pants/brilliant. Same qualificiations/experience but just not the same intelligence and honesty. I think the key factor is a person who is diligent and conscientious. Perhaps the way forward is to make it clear from the start, you will not be using the same electrician for remedial work, you will be using some other firm/electrician to put right any defects found. This is a growing trend for LLs to separate the two functions. Obviously there is a conflict of interests. Same with an MOT, again you need an honest and conscientious mechanic to ensure you will not be charged for unnecessary work.

I attach the EICR with personal details blanked out.

 

[Bob Geldoff1234]

I like failure no 2 on the report.No rcd label C2.WTF?
How will the tenant survive the night with this C2 danger present

 

[JH4Jill]

To be fair to NICEIC, of whom I have no liking, they inspect a qualified supervisor and inspect the company rather than the individuals in the company. There is no doubt in this scenario a rogue or two will get into the system and get away (for a certain time) with mayhem. As @Wilko says this is not the "norm" I think NICEIC have the right idea in making sure the work is, in the end, safe and compliant. No doubt the firm you had working for you will send someone who knows what they are doing. Optimistic I know but generally speaking I think I can safely say the many electricians on here would never do such work. It is as always a minority that spoils it and tars the whole lot. Try not to let this happen. I can see the steam coming out of your vents from here, and quite rightly. In the case of negligence there are three hurdles to jump. One, Is there a duty of care, Two, was that care breached, Three, did harm result from it? Clearly there is a duty, and it was breached. The "harm" arising is loss of money and potential danger in an electrical situation. The remedy? Fix the poor work. You have been offered a means of addressing this and have refused to take it. If you will not take the necessary steps to mitigating your losses then you have no recourse to law in the matter.

It’s not about the money. It’s about the possibility of a poor defenceless grandma needing to call out an electrician and gets scammed for her life savings.

It’s also about regulation and safety. For the consumer, there is no referee. I almost begged the NICEIC to send out an independent expert to mediate. I even said I would accept the contractor back if they were supervised by an NICEIC approved technician. They wouldn’t do either of them. I therefore don’t understand why they even bother with a complaints process.

 

[JH4Jill]

Sorry to hear of how badly you’ve been mucked about.
I’d just like to add (as a Former Aussie) that this BS is not the norm.

Thanks Wilko. I have an Aussie family downunder. They’re as straight as a dye.

 

[Strima]

C2 for labelling says it all for me. I don't even mention labels, I tend to just add them.

Also lots of mention of non compliance for RCDs yet has RCD test times for nearly all circuits yet no mention of RCDs anywhere on the circuit details or anywhere else.

I hate it when inspectors do not expand on the faults found either, SELV/PELV requirements so either a shaver socket or extra low voltage lighting faulty? Or is it because the 12 volt lamp holder is not earthed?

I probably know the answer already but do you have a photo of the consumer unit?

 

[loz2754]

The answer is, not willingly.
The government introduced part P of the building regulations back in 2005 which required certain types of electrical work carried out in domestic dwellings to be notified to the the local building control department.
The government arranged for electricians involved in this type of work to be able to self certify their own work as compliant with part P, and to notify building control. The only way an electrician could self certify and notify was through the Competent Person Schemes, several of which were set up by the government. These schemes included the likes of NICEIC and Napit etc.
So scheme membership was pretty much enforced on electricians working in the domestic field. (Another option available was/is to have the householder notify building control directly, which normally involves a large fee, so it would be more cost effective to use a registered electrician).

@UNG What do you dislike about my post?

 

[Vortigern]

The point being NICEIC did what they agree on the tin to do, make good. All you are going to get out of this at best is a refund and bad work made good. Often people get on a hobby horse and seek punitive action, this is not going to happen. Slowly as it goes the industry is trying to iron out these low points and poor skills and it is not easy to get a perfect system. Don't misunderstand I do feel sympathy for your situation, however it does not entitle you to go on a crusade to seek out a punish the wrongdoers. Putting you back into the situation you were before it happened is all you can hope for at best. There will be no witch hunts, Torquemada is dead! I completely agree about Granny getting scammed, however I can assure you better people are already on to this and working to make it better i.e. trading standards for one.

 

[Bob Geldoff1234]

I do feel the NICEIC need to do more in these type of situations.Asking the original electrician to come back to sort out the problems is not acceptable.The NIC should be investigating any complaints and taking to task the rogue outfits.In order for the public to put trust into these schemes then the schemes need to be seen to be keeping a tight ship.
Most people,after feeling they have been scammed,won't want the original person back to cause even more mayhem and stress.The NIC should have a process in place where a fully qualified and trusted electrician goes out to the job to assess and put right the situation.This should be paid for out of the NIC's platinum promise.Only then would the NIC seen to be standing behind what they claim to stand for.

 

[JH4Jill]

I like failure no 2 on the report.No rcd label C2.WTF?
How will the tenant survive the night with this C2 danger present

You might like the attached too ..

To be fair to NICEIC, of whom I have no liking, they inspect a qualified supervisor and inspect the company rather than the individuals in the company. There is no doubt in this scenario a rogue or two will get into the system and get away (for a certain time) with mayhem. As @Wilko says this is not the "norm" I think NICEIC have the right idea in making sure the work is, in the end, safe and compliant. No doubt the firm you had working for you will send someone who knows what they are doing. Optimistic I know but generally speaking I think I can safely say the many electricians on here would never do such work. It is as always a minority that spoils it and tars the whole lot. Try not to let this happen. I can see the steam coming out of your vents from here, and quite rightly. In the case of negligence there are three hurdles to jump. One, Is there a duty of care, Two, was that care breached, Three, did harm result from it? Clearly there is a duty, and it was breached. The "harm" arising is loss of money and potential danger in an electrical situation. The remedy? Fix the poor work. You have been offered a means of addressing this and have refused to take it. If you will not take the necessary steps to mitigating your losses then you have no recourse to law in the matter.

Just one last thing to add here. ‘The work’ was never necessary, whether it was poor or not. Are the contractors ever likely to admit that without a referee? The ‘remedial work’ would be to put the installation back to where it was before the ‘electrician’ intervened. All that was ever required was to reconnect a loose connection. The boiler engineer was called in the following day as the heating still wasn’t working. He had it sorted in 5 minutes.

 

[Vortigern]

Well it sounds as if you have found a decent electrician, keep his number!

 

[JH4Jill]

C2 for labelling says it all for me. I don't even mention labels, I tend to just add them.

Also lots of mention of non compliance for RCDs yet has RCD test times for nearly all circuits yet no mention of RCDs anywhere on the circuit details or anywhere else.

I hate it when inspectors do not expand on the faults found either, SELV/PELV requirements so either a shaver socket or extra low voltage lighting faulty? Or is it because the 12 volt lamp holder is not earthed?

I probably know the answer already but do you have a photo of the consumer unit?

Here it is..

 

[telectrix]

The NICEIC appear to be only interested in taking subscriptions. They seem to be disinterested in the quality of the workmanship of their members, nor for the safety of the general public.

Nail on head. they're all just parasites feeding off honest sparks. no better tha rated people and my builder. at least with the latters you have a choice of paying them or not.

 

[telectrix]

Here it is..
View attachment 63246

RCD label is clearly there. IMO a C2 might be appropriate for the mish-mash of protective devices. (and a C3 if i had to get on my knees to get the cover off).

 

[GBDamo]

Looks like all the RCD C2s are for the none standard Proteus RCD in a Wylex board.

C2s for labels is just plain daft.

The lack of specifics is telling, raising an issue without detailing it is inexcusable and stinks of manufacturing remedials.

Oh and top notch redacting, don't get a job with the government ?