HELP! EICR advice please

[a111an]

I wonder if any electricians can offer some advice? I feel that I may be getting taken for a ride. I rent out a 2 bedroom flat built in 2005 that has just needed an EICR. The letting agents have managed this for me and the report has come back as failed with a draft quote to pass the EICR that consists of a new consumer unit and other bits for £1173.60!

My main concerns in the report are that I have the following C2's.

A) Additional RCD protection is required for circuits supplying outdoor equipment...

The main sockets are on RCD protection, but it's a 3rd floor flat. I can't see why outdoor equipment would be mentioned?

B) Consumer unit is not fire rated...

Looking at the report it is a C2 on the Observations page, but on the Inspection schedule page, it's a C3. Could it be both?

Additionally to the C2's above, they are charging me to fix an open circuit on the earth, would they not have tested all the sockets on the test and fixed them, if required, as they went along?

I have also wondered what 'Replace fixed bathroom fittings' at £154+vat would be, any ideas?.


I have gone back to letting agent to pass my questions and concerns over to the electrical company and they have just responded with the following:

We have reviewed the EICR again and stand by what we have advised, the parts where the LL suggested the work doesn't need doing due to the regs is a really grey area, it depends on the engineer as to whether they would recommend the works or not - and rather we say they do not need work and an issue were to arise, that would leave us liable for not recommending these works be completed.

We might be airing on the side of caution, but we would rather be safe than sorry.

Is this a fair response, and not to answer my questions above? Does the report and draft quote look fair? EICR has already cost me £200.



Thank you for taking the time to read the above.

 

[Dartlec]

Just spotted another issue too - circuit 9 "heaters" is on a 32A in 2.5mm, but not tested for ring continuity.

The flat I checked did have a ring for the heaters, so I bet they forgot to test it.

 

[jackhammerJIM]

The amount of mistakes on the report brings the testers competency into dispute . I would get it retested by someone on this forum and refuse to pay the bill for the original EICR .
90 % sure it would be a satisfactory report if i had carried out the EICR .

 

[westward10]

I think your best bet is to prove the Report is incorrect, demand a refund and take @Dartlec up on his offer.

 

[Dartlec]

We've all made silly mistakes when doing a certificate late at night, but given the number on this report, it would be pulled apart in court were something to happen - or even if the local authority requested a copy and someone who knew what they were doing looked at it.

Not sure which scheme this company are with, but another alternative may be to approach them with specific concerns - though my suspicion is that they are often not terribly helpful, I can't see how they could see this report and say 'well that all seems fine'...

 

[Micktw68]

The tick boxes are always a dead giveaway of slapdash inspection.
I was pulled quite early on in my career by an eagle eyed QS who grilled me on where the other sources were located that I’d ticked As present.

 

[Simon47]

We have a problem at the moment in so far as the new laws regarding rental properties and eicrs.
i have to say I absolutely agree with the new laws.

The problem is There are thousands of landlords requiring EICRs now.

And the charlatans lined up and rubbing their hands with glee

So what is the answer? The landlord/lady lives hundreds of miles away so has to trust a third party to manage the property!

Based on my experience, I'd not consider having a property that wasn't close enough to manage myself. I've seen from the landlord's side that they don't know what they are doing*, and I've seen from the tenant's side (thanks to offspring in various rented places, as well as comments from tenants when I did use an agent) that they don't care and don't offer a decent service.
* Last one was when I got an email from the agent (let only) saying that I HAD to get an EICR done, blah, blah, blah. Funny, but I didn't get a reply when I pointed out five false statements in just 2 sentences - or pretty much everything they said !
Sadly, it's not an isolated occurance - I routinely get given information that's (at best) "misleadingly written" because it's supplied by some trade body or other with an eye on work for it's members rather than being honest. The agents (at least the smaller local ones) don't have the technical ability to write this stuff - so they have to rely on what they are told.

They provide an essential service, helping to relieve landlords of all that back-breaking work that they might otherwise have to do themselves.

If only

I really think there are sparks who think they are fully qualified doing EICR’s and are so far out of their depth that they don’t know what they are doing

I think part of the problem is the tendency to "install by numbers" - they don't know the regs, and can only follow the rules of thumb so "RFC on B32, lights on B6, ..." See the thread here where supposedly qualified electricians are telling someone that only a pull cord switch is allowed in a bathroom.
EDIT: It's a very different skill set doing testing vs house bashing installs, and a different set again for diagnostics. Sadly, I've found that the heating engineers are often no better at diagnostics - I remember one occasion when the boiler in the flat was playing up and it was only when I told them what the fault was (after several visits by different engineers that failed to identify it) that they actually fixed it. And all it was was a failed microswitch so the boiler didn't know when hot water was being called for - p**s-poor design to put it right where any leaks would drip on it.

I think your best bet is to prove the Report is incorrect, demand a refund and take @Dartlec up on his offer.

I'd agree. Furthermore, consider reporting the outfit to whichever scam ... err I mean approved scheme ... they are a member of. Unless they are reported and the scam does something, then they'll carry on fleecing vulnerable landlords. Of course, we don't expect the scam to throw out a member who's paying their membership fee

We've all made silly mistakes when doing a certificate late at night, but given the number on this report, it would be pulled apart in court were something to happen - or even if the local authority requested a copy and someone who knew what they were doing looked at it.

Trouble is, the clockis ticking on the 28 day rule, and the LA won't care and probably don't employ anyone who'd know an EICR from a MWC. All they'll see is "unsatisfactory" and go off to add it to their statistics.

 

[a111an]

A little update and after a fair bit of back and forth the company have agreed to refund for the report.

Below are there responses to my questions from the company, I don't think I need to comment further!

Going forward I now need to arrange another test with a competent person. Thanks everyone for all the excellent advice.

Question 1
C2 - Additional RCD protection is required for circuits supplying outdoor equipment...The general and kitchen sockets are on RCD protection (although the trip times are missing in the report) and it's a 3rd floor flat. I can't see why outdoor equipment would be mentioned? Please explain.

​

If I'm being honest, this is an observation which we come across in 90% of all properties so it's on the template we use. It doesn't relate to this property.​

​

Question 2
C2 - Consumer unit is not fire rated...
Looking at the report it is a C2 on the Observations page, but on the Inspection schedule page, it's a C3. Which is it? Please explain.

​

Further to our telephone conversation with regards to it being a local authority requirement I had a quick look and they advise to follow the government requirements which would class this as a C3 as per your observation page, sorry to be a right pain but I know the Landlord will do their research.​

​

Again, referring to our call, we have found the majority of local authorities are insisting on this. Especially, the London boroughs.​

​

Question 3
The draft quote has 'Replace fixed bathroom fittings' at £154+vat. What is this?

​

As you can see from the images these are not IP rated. It's an error on our part, juggling the sheer volume of work we taken on in the last few months, the reports were being handwritten and then typed up by our operations staff, the cross-over admittedly created a few issues, all our engineers now have their own laptops and are creating the reports on site.​

​

Smoke detectors – are not part of the regs, the installation supply is but not the expiry date in relation to an EICR.

​

This mostly comes down to preference from the agents we work with, most of whom, instruct us to check the alarms whilst we're carrying out our tests. As you can see from the images attached the alarms within the property have expired.​

 

[westward10]

Thanks for the update and a good result. Their reasoning quite frankly is poor, using templates, passing the buck to others and following third party guidance as opposed to the requirements of BS7671.
I am afraid to say this is now typical of our industry and I hope you get a better outcome in the future.

 

[Dartlec]

A little update and after a fair bit of back and forth the company have agreed to refund for the report.

Below are there responses to my questions from the company, I don't think I need to comment further!

Going forward I now need to arrange another test with a competent person. Thanks everyone for all the excellent advice.

Question 1
C2 - Additional RCD protection is required for circuits supplying outdoor equipment...The general and kitchen sockets are on RCD protection (although the trip times are missing in the report) and it's a 3rd floor flat. I can't see why outdoor equipment would be mentioned? Please explain.

​

If I'm being honest, this is an observation which we come across in 90% of all properties so it's on the template we use. It doesn't relate to this property.​

​

Question 2
C2 - Consumer unit is not fire rated...
Looking at the report it is a C2 on the Observations page, but on the Inspection schedule page, it's a C3. Which is it? Please explain.

​

Further to our telephone conversation with regards to it being a local authority requirement I had a quick look and they advise to follow the government requirements which would class this as a C3 as per your observation page, sorry to be a right pain but I know the Landlord will do their research.​

​

Again, referring to our call, we have found the majority of local authorities are insisting on this. Especially, the London boroughs.​

​

Question 3
The draft quote has 'Replace fixed bathroom fittings' at £154+vat. What is this?

​

As you can see from the images these are not IP rated. It's an error on our part, juggling the sheer volume of work we taken on in the last few months, the reports were being handwritten and then typed up by our operations staff, the cross-over admittedly created a few issues, all our engineers now have their own laptops and are creating the reports on site.​

​

Smoke detectors – are not part of the regs, the installation supply is but not the expiry date in relation to an EICR.

​

This mostly comes down to preference from the agents we work with, most of whom, instruct us to check the alarms whilst we're carrying out our tests. As you can see from the images attached the alarms within the property have expired.​

Credit to them for backing down I guess - but that sounds like they realised that they wouldn't be able to defend that report should anyone with electrical knowledge see it.

The template comment is hardly encouraging - just makes you wonder how many other properties have had an incorrect C2 applied.