How would you advise customer

[Wilko]

Ok, understood.
It would take a lot to justify a rewire, IMHO. Just wondering, was the circuit RCBO controlled (and still having its functional earth connected) ?

 

[The Ghost]

Nay its an old wylex rewirable fuse bridge. There is quite a bit more to this. But I was asked to check if the lighting was ok enough to avoid a re-wire. It was quite simply, but another electrician got the job of re-wiring based on his telling the customer wiring "not fit for purpose" Now the guy is not paying me because I did not tell him what two other electricians said ...that it must be rewired! I dont want to go on too much but I am sure you get the drift. And as I said the cable was out of the CU for IR test, you know the drill bulbs out etc.

 

[ruston]

Yes , the sharp intake of breath brigade,

 

[The Ghost]

Yes , the sharp intake of breath brigade,

Couldnt have said it better

 

[ruston]

Sick of hearing " that's illegal."

 

[Pat H]

I'd just chalk it up to experience.
Next time if a similar situation occurs maybe explain that its currently a pass but the results indicate an issue that should be investigated and resolved. A re-wire would solve that but it could be something simpler. You can then offer to investigate further or provide a new circuit and avoid the issue (for now). But I'd also explain that of course the simple answer the customer may get from others is to just rewire.

 

[The Ghost]

I'd just chalk it up to experience.

I would love to but the customer is pursuing through Trading standards, CPS scheme, solicitor its interesting at the moment is all that I would say

 

[HandySparks]

I would love to but the customer is pursuing through Trading standards, CPS scheme, solicitor its interesting at the moment is all that I would say

So you extended a lighting circuit in accordance with the regs and now the customer pursuing you because you didn't advise that there were signs of a problem on the circuit? Is that the gist of it?

 

[The Ghost]

So you extended a lighting circuit in

No, I inspected existing lighting circuit to ascertain whether it needs re-wiring. Lowest reading was 4.5 Mohms so I told customer it is up to regs and I cannot say it needs re-wiring. Customer asks me to extend that same lighting circuit, I decline as I know it will go wrong at some point. He gets in two other electricians who said (no doubt with "a sharp intake of breath") oh yes it must be rewired. So customer is taking it that I did not advise him correctly. But in fact he has been duped imo.

 

[Pat H]

No problem then. Your report will support your findings.
Not sure what material loss the client is suing to recover?
And no chance of a successful outcome.
This is just posturing to escape your fee.
I'd hand your invoice claim to a debt collection agency and let them pursue it. Even if they take a big wack it puts you back in control.

 

[HandySparks]

So is he trying to avoid paying your invoice for work inspecting this circuit or is he claiming some other 'loss'?

 

[The Ghost]

Well I think to go any further may be for the Arms. He is definitely trying to avoid paying. I have sent in a collection agency. And what he has come up with is science fiction.

 

[Richard Burns]

You have here a difference in your own opinions as you say it is safe for use and also that it is not safe enough to extend, which are incompatible selections.
However your initial response that it meets the requirements of the regulations and is not dangerous and it does not need a rewire are correct.
It may be a good idea to identify that the circuit has declined from it's original condition but only repeated tests over time can identify if it is a problem, though further testing may pin point the cause of the lower reading, which may be rectifiable.
Effectively a difference of opinion between your accurate approach and their inaccurate but ultra safe (possibly fraudulent) approach is just that, a difference of opinion, with the balance of accuracy and professionalism on your side.

 

[bigspark17]

Dohhh! YES it was completely disconnected dont know what I was thinking about
But the question????

Why are you disconnecting cpc in cu for IR tests? Or have i read it wrong?

 

[Pat H]

I don't agree they are incompatible positions.
Its quite correct to have a safe set up that may well remain safe. But adding to that arrangement adds potential risks the OP declined to engage.
That is logical and appropriate.