Liability question

[Nick Newton]

Hello,

I apologise if this isn't the appropriate forum for this question.

What is the UK law regarding liability of electrician certifiers if the electricians they certify go on to produce illegal or poor quality work? If they are liable for certifying someone incorrectly, is there a time limit after certification beyond which they would not be liable?

Any help much appreciated,
Nick.

 

[trev]

If you carry out an installation then you are responsible for it's safe condition, your certificate merely proves that when you left it it was safe. Obviously, there will be ways of forensically reviewing an installation to see if it was actually unsafe but I don't know how it would be done. I don't know of any competent spark who would be prepared to sign off someone else's work unless they were heavily involved in it from square one. Time limits for liability, no idea but I'd guess there will be one.

 

[JamesBrownLive]

You cannot certify someone elses work, period. How could you, unless you were there looking over their shoulder the whole time?

They install, they certify.

 

[Rockingit]

What is the UK law regarding liability of electrician certifiers if the electricians they certify go on to produce illegal or poor quality work?

Are you asking about the actual scheme certifiers? As in, an electrician registered with NICEIC (say) as competent to sign off their own work but you believe isn't, what recourse do you have back to the NICEIC or what legal responsibility does the NICEIC then have?

If so, I'm not 100% sure of the full legalities as I'm not a lawyer, but in the first instance if it's a complaint against the electrician then you would contact the NICEIC (in this example), if you believe the NICEIC are at fault then I would suggest Trading Standards.

 

[Dan23584]

You cannot certify someone elses work, period. How could you, unless you were there looking over their shoulder the whole time?

They install, they certify.

Some one rang me up last week saying that they have re-wired there house themselves and now want to sell it, so would I certify it for them! You can guess my response.

 

[JamesBrownLive]

Some one rang me up last week saying that they have re-wired there house themselves and now want to sell it, so would I certify it for them! You can guess my response.

Something along the lines of... :89:

 

[Ponty Massive]

Some one rang me up last week saying that they have re-wired there house themselves and now want to sell it, so would I certify it for them! You can guess my response.

Had a simular thing the other day, electrician called me to say he's an approved contractor but didn't have part p, would I sign it? When I asked why he wasn't part p, said "I'm not paying the fee every year." So I told him "Well I have too!"

 

[VoltzElectrical]

My understanding of the situation is that if you are a DI full scope then you cannot certify anyone else's work. But If you are an approved contractor then you can test and certify the work of the installers in your company. Ie. company with approved contractor status employs or subcontracts labour for install, then has a member of the company responsible for testing and certifying the installation, ie, signing off someone else's work.

Is this correct, 'cos it's certainly the scenario I've been working under the last 5 years?

 

[netblindpaul]

Yes Voltz it is, however, this work is done by the "enterprise" signing it off, even though they may have used subbies.
It is the QS type scheme run by the larger organisations, the NIC & the ECA allow such scenarios.
I'm not sure about the other schemes, but I can't see how they can stop it.
In a way it's like you having an apprentice or an electricians mate, they do some of the work themselves, but you sign it off.

 

[JamesBrownLive]

My understanding of the situation is that if you are a DI full scope then you cannot certify anyone else's work. But If you are an approved contractor then you can test and certify the work of the installers in your company. Ie. company with approved contractor status employs or subcontracts labour for install, then has a member of the company responsible for testing and certifying the installation, ie, signing off someone else's work.

Is this correct, 'cos it's certainly the scenario I've been working under the last 5 years?

Voltz,

Are you saying that you don't put your name to anything and that another person in your company comes along when everything is done and dusted, and signs all the paperwork? Even the section for installation?

 

[Rockingit]

I think people need to remember that there are (or can be) THREE signatures on an installation cert - design, installation and testing. If they want to sign the first two, then as far as I can see, there's little wrong with you testing it and signing as such.

 

[JamesBrownLive]

I think people need to remember that there are (or can be) THREE signatures on an installation cert - design, installation and testing. If they want to sign the first two, then as far as I can see, there's little wrong with you testing it and signing as such.

That's why I asked about Voltz signing the installation section.

Surely, even in companies that operate a QS system, the person that does the actual installation, signs on the dotted line, not some QS??

 

[VoltzElectrical]

Voltz,

Are you saying that you don't put your name to anything and that another person in your company comes along when everything is done and dusted, and signs all the paperwork? Even the section for installation?

in a word - yes. I've never seen or signed any paperwork. These are large contracts, schools, hospitals, theatres etc... with up to 20 sparks, mates, labourers whatever. You go to work, install, go home, one day go to the next job and so it goes. The job gets tested and commissioned and signed off. Done. What is this if not signing off someone else's work? It is allowed under the approved contractor scheme with a qualified supervisor who signs off the work.

To my mind, this scenario doesn't always have to be on the bigger jobs. For example you could have a AC firm with a QS who take on lots of small jobs, house rewires etc.. and sub the work out, but the QS tests and certifies the work.

i stand to be corrected as always.

regards

 

[JamesBrownLive]

in a word - yes. I've never seen or signed any paperwork. These are large contracts, schools, hospitals, theatres etc... with up to 20 sparks, mates, labourers whatever. You go to work, install, go home, one day go to the next job and so it goes. The job gets tested and commissioned and signed off. Done. What is this if not signing off someone else's work? It is allowed under the approved contractor scheme with a qualified supervisor who signs off the work.

To my mind, this scenario doesn't always have to be on the bigger jobs. For example you could have a AC firm with a QS who take on lots of small jobs, house rewires etc.. and sub the work out, but the QS tests and certifies the work.

i stand to be corrected as always.

regards

I guess in massive jobs, where there is more than one person working on something, it would be impossible to work any other way. How could you have 5 different people signing for installation, it would be an administrative nightmare.

Can I just ask, does your company QS come along and inspect stuff during installation, or do they just trust you enough to get the job done correctly?

Cheers

 

[VoltzElectrical]

Trust. But on most jobs there is a foreman on the books who goes to meetings, organizes materials and prioritizes order of work and generally oversees the installation. Dunno what he signs, but i suspect nothing. And mostly useless too. The last guy couldn't wire two way and intermediate switches in twin and earth. i had to hear him out and then wait for him to go away and let me wire it the right way! Standing joke in the company, lol.

 

[EastAnglian]

If I understand your question correctly you are questioning an electrician's competence to do the job correctly. If this is the case, and if the job was in an occupied domestic premises then the electrician, or the electrician's company would need to be registered with a "Part P" scheme. If you believe the work has not been done correctly (i.e. in accordance with the Regulations) then you should take this up in the first instance with the "Qualified Supervisor" for the electrician's company or failing that the registration body with whom they are affiliated. You will need the company's registration number to do this.

If you employed a sparkie who is not part P registered, or your job does not come under the Part P scheme then really it is up to you to check that the electician is suitably qualified before employing him/her.

 

[GLENNSPARK]

That's why I asked about Voltz signing the installation section.

Surely, even in companies that operate a QS system, the person that does the actual installation, signs on the dotted line, not some QS??

the multiple signiture form has sections to sign for the designer....installer....and the inspector/tester.....each person would autograph it for the work THEY carried out...hence multiple signiture.........

 

[JamesBrownLive]

the multiple signiture form has sections to sign for the designer....installer....and the inspector/tester.....each person would autograph it for the work THEY carried out...hence multiple signiture.........

Blimey Glenn, I'm not that dopey..........Yes, I understand that. That is why I specifically mentioned the installation "section".

What I was not taking into consideration was that on massive jobs, it would be impossible for all the people involved to sign the paperwork. So maybe I am dopey after all :stuart:

In Voltz's case despite undertaking the actual installation work, he signs nothing. Which is what I was trying to find out in the first place.

Cheers

 

[richy3333]

Hello,

I apologise if this isn't the appropriate forum for this question.

What is the UK law regarding liability of electrician certifiers if the electricians they certify go on to produce illegal or poor quality work? If they are liable for certifying someone incorrectly, is there a time limit after certification beyond which they would not be liable?

Any help much appreciated,
Nick.

Nock, I think yo need to provide more info as people are reading different scenarios into what you have said.

To me, you seem to be suggesting a situation where a spark is assessed by a body (NICEIC, NAPIT etc) and then goes on to produce poor work? The Statue for limitations is 3 years for personal injury and 6 years for property damage (which would include professional indemnity/negligence). There would then be an argument as to when the 'clock starts ticking' date of accrual of knowledge (of negligent act) or date damage caused?

Personally, I've heard plenty of horrific stories about so called competent sparkies being passed for their Part P when they clearly were not safe.