Oh my God, are you serious?

It says the complete opposite.

This is now hilarious.
How does “By rights appropriate certification appended to your report should be sufficient.” differ from what you have been saying?
You still haven’t explained.
 
The word ‘trolling’ is the present participle of the word ‘troll’.
By stating that I am trolling, you are stating that I am at present actively being a troll.

Ok. Nice side step from the issue. Painting my living room does not make me a painter.

Do you accept that you are incorrect in your understanding of the EICR sign off procedure.
 
How does “By rights appropriate certification appended to your report should be sufficient.” differ from what you have been saying?
You still haven’t explained.

Your Post 3 contradicts itself and shows a misunderstanding of how EICRs should be signed off. You have further clarifies your misunderstanding by confirming that you do not give a next inspection due date on unsatisfactory EICRs.
 
Ok. Nice side step from the issue. Painting my living room does not make me a painter.

Do you accept that you are incorrect in your understanding of the EICR sign off procedure.
Actually, it does.
It doesn’t make you a professional painter, but a painter is someone who paints.

No.
BS7671 allows me as the Inspector to determine when an installation should next be inspected.
If I do not consider an Installation is safe for continued use, then I am not obliged to state the installation should continue to be used and inspected in x amount of years.
 
Your Post 3 contradicts itself and shows a misunderstanding of how EICRs should be signed off. You have further clarifies your misunderstanding by confirming that you do not give a next inspection due date on unsatisfactory EICRs.
Please explain how it contradicts itself?
 
Actually, it does.
It doesn’t make you a professional painter, but a painter is someone who paints.

No.
BS7671 allows me as the Inspector to determine when an installation should next be inspected.
If I do not consider an Installation is safe for continued use, then I am not obliged to state the installation should continue to be used and inspected in x amount of years.

This is what I mean by your misunderstanding of how the sign off procedure works. You have summed it up perfectly above.

It has been explained many times how it works and I have nothing more to add on it. Happy to help but you seem to be digging your heels in a little for some reason even though you are incorrect.
 
You start by saying additional certification ‘should’ surfice then go on to say that if they want a satisfactory EICR then you will need to test again.

Come on. Jesus.
If the client wants the report to state Satisfactory rather than Unsatisfactory, then the installation would have to be inspected again.
 
No the client would need to be educated.
The problem with that, is that some Insurance companies will not accept Unsatisfactory reports even with appropriate certification for remedial work appended to the report.
Some insist the report must state Satisfactory.
Which is why I stated first:
“By rights appropriate certification appended to your report should be sufficient.”
 
^^^ I am looking at the pair of your comments. IMO my 2 pence worth if an EICR has been carried out, and lets say c1 for x c2 for y has been recorded, and remedial work has been carried out to correct the installation with paper work ie MWC, then in my mind that would go hand in hand with the previous EICR end off.
 
Would have thought that any remedial work carried out after an unsatisfactory EICR would be covered by either a MWC or EIC so job done?
If covered by an EIC, the EIC will show the date of the next inspection.
 
^^^ I am looking at the pair of your comments. IMO my 2 pence worth if an EICR has been carried out, and lets say c1 for x c2 for y has been recorded, and remedial work has been carried out to correct the installation with paper work ie MWC, then in my mind that would go hand in hand with the previous EICR end off.
Yes, that should by rights be the case.
But what if that work isn’t done for 6 years?
 
All remedial works are to be done as a matter of urgency. 6 years would not meet that criteria.
Yeah, but the next inspection isn’t for 10 years, got loads of time.
Just as long as it’s done before the next inspection, it’ll be ok.
 
what a farce ........... nobody can agree ............ but thing is for sure, and based on personal experience......... handing an unsatisfactory EICR and a couple of MWC's to a letting agent doesn't always guarantee they will "accept" that the installation is now "satisfactory"
 
what a farce ........... nobody can agree ............ but thing is for sure, and based on personal experience......... handing an unsatisfactory EICR and a couple of MWC's to a letting agent doesn't always guarantee they will "accept" that the installation is now "satisfactory"

To be fair it is only one member that seems to not understand how it should work.
 
Only for that item of work. Not the whole installation.
Judging from your comments regarding clients wanting a report to state ‘Satisfactory”, I can only assume you rarely conduct periodic Inspection and Testing.
In my experience which dates back to before the IEE/IET introduced the model forms, the majority of installations which require the client to obtain a report, would not willingly accept a report which states ‘Unsatisfactory’.

Personally, before completing and issuing a report, I will inform the client of the defects I have found, and offer to rectify those defects, in order to issue a ‘Satisfactory’ report.

Others will issue the report, offer to rectify the defects and also offer to issue another ‘Satisfactory’ report once the work is completed.

Others still will attend a property to Inspect, rectify any faults, not issue any certification for their work, make no notification and then issue a Visual.
 
Judging from your comments regarding clients wanting a report to state ‘Satisfactory”, I can only assume you rarely conduct periodic Inspection and Testing.
In my experience which dates back to before the IEE/IET introduced the model forms, the majority of installations which require the client to obtain a report, would not willingly accept a report which states ‘Unsatisfactory’.

Personally, before completing and issuing a report, I will inform the client of the defects I have found, and offer to rectify those defects, in order to issue a ‘Satisfactory’ report.

Others will issue the report, offer to rectify the defects and also offer to issue another ‘Satisfactory’ report once the work is completed.

Others still will attend a property to Inspect, rectify any faults, not issue any certification for their work, make no notification and then issue a Visual.

We do more than enough. Regardless of how many we do my ability to understand and read basic guidance is not linked with how many I carry out.

Experience means nothing if during that time you were doing it incorrectly.
 
If you do more than enough, how is it you are unaware of the widespread demand for ‘Satisfactory’ reports?
I’ve spoken to Insurance companies on a number of occasions regarding this issue, not always successfully.
Client has had an ‘Unsatisfactory’ report, had the work done to rectify the defects, the Insurance company wants a new ‘Satisfactory’ report.
 
If you do more than enough, how is it you are unaware of the widespread demand for ‘Satisfactory’ reports?
I’ve spoken to Insurance companies on a number of occasions regarding this issue, not always successfully.
Client has had an ‘Unsatisfactory’ report, had the work done to rectify the defects, the Insurance company wants a new ‘Satisfactory’ report.

Maybe you do not educate your clients as well as I do. I do about £50k worth of EICRs a year and never have the issue you describe.
 
might get some from SWD, now he's gender neutral. :eek::eek::eek:.
 
The last EICR I did was an unsatisfactory based on inadequate sized main earth and Equipotential bonding. A simple fix as it was all in a cellar.

Problem is that the customer decided to DIY the upgrade himself - and I never went back. So he (maybe) has ‘satisfactory’ Installation but an unsatisfactory report. He was the land lord of this rented property as well - so I wonder how he would get on with the insurers?

It’s all a bit of a minefield?
 
The last EICR I did was an unsatisfactory based on inadequate sized main earth and Equipotential bonding. A simple fix as it was all in a cellar.

Problem is that the customer decided to DIY the upgrade himself - and I never went back. So he (maybe) has ‘satisfactory’ Installation but an unsatisfactory report. He was the land lord of this rented property as well - so I wonder how he would get on with the insurers?

It’s all a bit of a minefield?

It is really not a minefield. It is very very simple.

The insurer would probably not accept anyone not a member of a scheme carrying out the works.
 
The last EICR I did was an unsatisfactory based on inadequate sized main earth and Equipotential bonding. A simple fix as it was all in a cellar.

Problem is that the customer decided to DIY the upgrade himself - and I never went back. So he (maybe) has ‘satisfactory’ Installation but an unsatisfactory report. He was the land lord of this rented property as well - so I wonder how he would get on with the insurers?

It’s all a bit of a minefield?

Not your problem .............
 
If a report is unsatisfactory there will be a list of observations , If those observations have been rectified there will be paper work to show that ,
We produce a spread sheet listing them so its easy to cross referance .we have done doing this for years and all our customers find it easy to understand for example
Item ................Observation .............. Action carried out ............Results
1 . Broken socket in reception ...........Replaced socket...........0.45

Just a ruff example we put all relevant test reading depending on what work carried out.
 
How about doing the appropriate certificate for the remedial work plus an EICR with detailed limitations referenced to a copy of the unsatisfactory report?
An EICR has already be done so the condition of the installation has been reported there is no requirement to carry out another EICR untill the current one is out of date
 
I realise that but if the customer is not happy with certs and want another EICR... but then how many clients actually know what they are asking for?
 
What certification would be issued for replacing a broken socket front or switch plate?
How about a missing MCB blank?
Missing cover for a CU?
Switching over cables on incorrectly labelled circuits?
Replacing a socket with a blanking plate?
 
I realise that but if the customer is not happy with certs and want another EICR... but then how many clients actually know what they are asking for?
I tell them they cant have one ,we just send them the releveant paper work and we have never had any issues
 
I realise that but if the customer is not happy with certs and want another EICR... but then how many clients actually know what they are asking for?
As most EICRs are done so the client can give a copy of the report to someone else, what the client actually knows may not matter.
 

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Green 2 Go Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses Heating 2 Go
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

Advert

Daily, weekly or monthly email

Thread starter

Joined
Location
Newcastle Upon Tyne

Thread Information

Title
EICR rectifications completed by another electrician, what now?
Prefix
N/A
Forum
Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification
Start date
Last reply date
Replies
82

Advert

Thread statistics

Created
alex kane,
Last reply from
123,
Replies
82
Views
15,563

Advert

Back
Top