UK Pricing

[Craighrvy]

Hi all

I'm making steps to get back on the road after being made redundant. Cheers Covid 19
I've priced a job up and the guy says I'm far too expensive.
I've done a fair bit of research so I'm fairly certain I'm at least competitive, just wondered how much people would charge as I've been out of the game for 10 years

Kitchen rewire
New ring circuit
7 double sockets
3 fused spur drops for appliances
2 x cooker circuits
12 downlighters
1 lighting point and switch for wall light
Disconnect old ring and make safe with junction boxes
Add 2 x new mbcs to existing consumer unit

Fair amount of chasing to be done

All works to be inspected, tested and part p notified which I'm going to have to pay a sparks for.

Thanks in advance for the replys

 

[Craighrvy]

Seems like I got lucky, or maybe things have changed - When I joined Part P was still new - and they carried out my initial inspection on a consumer unit change at my father's house, then I notified it once I'd passed!

Don't suppose there is any other building Regs notification on this job (eg for extension or a beam going in)? If I remember correctly it used to be that if you paid their building regs fee for any work then in theory that should also cover the cost of them certifying electrical work, though in practise they often refused and there wasn't much you could do about it to force them.

That may be out of date, as it was a long time ago that I saw it come up.

For what it's worth, that price sounds perfectly reasonable for the South East - i doubt he'd find anyone cheaper who would actually notify it. That many downlights alone could cause no end of trouble if the ceilings not down and joists are all over the place as is often the case....

I had a similar experience when I signed up with Napit, but again that was when part p was new. Guy came for a look at my test gear, certs. Then we went to a job I'd done for my mates sister, not notified consumer unit and additional socket. Signed it off there and then. Guess they have to be a bit stricter but from what I have been reading, you don't have to have level 3 to get part p which is ridiculous
[automerge]1595622823[/automerge]

If I recall correctly there was a memo from the relevant department confirming that BC should cover the testing of electrical installation at their own cost - but I think it was so long ago it was a Labour Government!

They do love that word "competent" though, even when it's so poorly defined overall...
[automerge]1595622172[/automerge]


South East here too, and have to say that the guy they usually send to do my assessment has been very good - very experienced, knowledgeable, but happy to have a discussion if you know what you're talking about and definitely on the supportive side and not looking to catch you out.

He is not employed by them directly though and might do all the schemes for all I know.

Not that I've got anything else from the NICEIC over the years apart from bills, but their website usually works and it's the one people have heard of, so not seen any reason to change.

Last time I checked, the prices for most of the schemes were all so similar that it was obvious they'd all decided what the market rate was, rather than work it out based on their costs! <cynic mode>

If you read the reviews, it's all customers complaining about niceic registered wannabee sparks who have lashed it up, and the niceic have failed to follow up on it, or made good on their platinum promise to pay a proper sparks to put it right. Really just seems to be a money spinner for them, cowboys who undercut decent sparks still get the jobs and undercut the guys who do a decent job, and seem to get away with it. Has anyone actually heard of someone getting prosecuted for mot notifying their work?

 

[Midwest]

@pc1966 Where we lead in Scotlan, England the follows ?

Obviously we are not greater than you.

 

[Dartlec]

Has anyone actually heard of someone getting prosecuted for mot notifying their work?

Technically isn't the offence committed by the homeowner or landlord though? In which case I imagine it's not great PR to prosecute individual homeowners.

There have been a few electricians prosecuted by Trading Standards I've seen, but not specifically under Part P - and god knows how bad they must be to get to that stage!

 

[Midwest]

Technically isn't the offence committed by the homeowner or landlord though? In which case I imagine it's not great PR to prosecute individual homeowners.

There have been a few electricians prosecuted by Trading Standards I've seen, but not specifically under Part P - and god knows how bad they must be to get to that stage!

Whilst the home owner is responsible to ensure work is compliant, and can forced to remove or rectify the works, or pay for the rectification, prosecution would normally be taken on the persons carry out the work Planning Portal

I’ve never read of a prosecution of failure to notify electrical works, but have had several customers asking for copies of certificates and one asking about a compliance certificate, when they have been selling their properties. Any notifiable works not registered, may well be revealed during local land search. Home owner is also required to sign a document when selling, to confirm (amongst other things) if any electrical work has been carried out since 2005.

 

[Craighrvy]

Whilst the home owner is responsible to ensure work is compliant, and can forced to remove or rectify the works, or pay for the rectification, prosecution would normally be taken on the persons carry out the work Planning Portal

I’ve never read of a prosecution of failure to notify electrical works, but have had several customers asking for copies of certificates and one asking about a compliance certificate, when they have been selling their properties. Any notifiable works not registered, may well be revealed during local land search. Home owner is also required to sign a document when selling, to confirm (amongst other things) if any electrical work has been carried out since 2005.

Pretty sure a land search will only show up external service moves, water mains, drain etc. Definitely If the work isn't notified, it won't show on any searches.
When you sell a house the questions about electrical alterations is just a tick box, yes or no and I imagine DIY Joe is just going to tick the "no" box. Surveyors just look at the fuse board and guess the age/condition from that, they don't even take the cover off.

 

[Midwest]

Pretty sure a land search will only show up external service moves, water mains, drain etc. Definitely If the work isn't notified, it won't show on any searches.
When you sell a house the questions about electrical alterations is just a tick box, yes or no and I imagine DIY Joe is just going to tick the "no" box. Surveyors just look at the fuse board and guess the age/condition from that, they don't even take the cover off.

If the property has any work done on it, such as a CU change, and it has been notified, it will be registered as such on the LBC website, some LBC web sites are better than others.

If the change hasn’t been notified, then the obvious presence of a new CU, might be an issue for a prospective buyer.

Having recently sold a property, the ‘tick box’ document, is slightly more in depth than that, and amongst other things requires necessary certification and compliance certificate for various works, including electrical work.

The vendor then has to sign the form, and declare honest disclosure.
Of course you can lie, but you are signing a legally binding document.

 

[Craighrvy]

If the property has any work done on it, such as a CU change, and it has been notified, it will be registered as such on the LBC website, some LBC web sites are better than others.

If the change hasn’t been notified, then the obvious presence of a new CU, might be an issue for a prospective buyer.

Having recently sold a property, the ‘tick box’ document, is slightly more in depth than that, and amongst other things requires necessary certification and compliance certificate for various works, including electrical work.

The vendor then has to sign the form, and declare honest disclosure.
Of course you can lie, but you are signing a legally binding document.

That's the thing though, people just lie and face no legal repercussions. Once the solicitor has their sale they don't want anymore involvement. Average Joe isn't going to know if a fuse board has been replaced recently or not. These things only come to light if there are problems later on. Again, how many people, tradesman or diyers have you heard of who have faced legal action for lying about undeclared works? If it was to be discovered or declared before the sale, it would just be used as an opportunity to lower the sale price. They won't ever go after the person who fitted it. I say they, who would be responsible ? Building control wouldn't be interested at all I imagine, niceic don't seem to follow up on their contractors that do bad jobs either by the sound of it

 

[Dartlec]

That's the thing though, people just lie and face no legal repercussions. Once the solicitor has their sale they don't want anymore involvement. Average Joe isn't going to know if a fuse board has been replaced recently or not. These things only come to light if there are problems later on. Again, how many people, tradesman or diyers have you heard of who have faced legal action for lying about undeclared works? If it was to be discovered or declared before the sale, it would just be used as an opportunity to lower the sale price. They won't ever go after the person who fitted it. I say they, who would be responsible ? Building control wouldn't be interested at all I imagine, niceic don't seem to follow up on their contractors that do bad jobs either by the sound of it

The reason I initally moved into electrics back in 2005ish was not just Part P, but the expectation that Home Information Packs would include an electrical test of a property so that any potential buyers would be aware of the state of the electrics.

Of course that didn't happen, possibly because of the lobbying from Estate Agents who thought their bloated fees might be dented.

Had it happened, and similar weight been put on it as an equivalent bulding survey, then maybe we might be in a much better place now. Surveyors certainly do face repercussions if they miss something serious.

Arguably, doing that 10 years ago would probably have added more to home safety than forcing all metal consumer units or trying to push AFDDs
[automerge]1595685308[/automerge]

If the property has any work done on it, such as a CU change, and it has been notified, it will be registered as such on the LBC website, some LBC web sites are better than others.

If the change hasn’t been notified, then the obvious presence of a new CU, might be an issue for a prospective buyer.

Having recently sold a property, the ‘tick box’ document, is slightly more in depth than that, and amongst other things requires necessary certification and compliance certificate for various works, including electrical work.

The vendor then has to sign the form, and declare honest disclosure.
Of course you can lie, but you are signing a legally binding document.

It still can't legally require you to produce an electrical certificate though, can it? I've had some clients ring to say they've been told they need a certificate to complete a sale which I didn't think was the case. (not for work I've done, but just generally to sell a house I mean)

If there is notified Part P work then there should be a corresponding electrical certificate of course, but outside of that is there a legal requirement to produce anything before a sale can be completed?

Obviously it might be for the buyer to exercise caution or drop the price to reflect any possible risk, just like with anything else - but EICRs for private properties are not a legal requirement as we know.

 

[Midwest]

As with any statutory offence, there are various considerations to be taken into account before a prosecution is considered. LBC are responsible for such action, but in most cases I suspect, they would seek to get things rectified. I have read of some electrical companies founding themselves in court for not following due process, but they are few & far between, I admit. I suspect only cases which were serious or persistent, would attract prosecution.

If you tell lies when completing a legal document, then that would be for the buyer to decided to continue with the agreement & purchase (if it was found out). And of course, the lack of certification etc, could & should be reflected in the negotiation of the agreed price, the new owner might have to incur additional costs to rectify.

If the owner is honest, and says they have had works carried out, which were not compliant and or do not have the appropriate documentation, then that is for the purchaser to decide whether to proceed of not. They might wish to consider, how that would be declared in obtaining property insurance.

 

[Dartlec]

If the owner is honest, and says they have had works carried out, which were not compliant and or do not have the appropriate documentation, then that is for the purchaser to decide whether to proceed of not. They might wish to consider, how that would be declared in obtaining property insurance.

not to derail the thread completely, but insurance is a whole different bag of worms. My guess is that most of them don't specify frequency of inspection or anything, but may end up with some reference to the householder maintaining it as 'safe' which could be argued happily over in court for days no doubt.

 

[Zerax]

As I've mentioned on this illustrious forum before... it is considered 'normal' practice for indemnity insurance to be taken out by the vendor, regardless of whether or not they have certificates/warranties/inspections etc.

In fact, I was chatting to a client only yesterday about her recent house sale & purchase and her solicitor was almost demanding that she take out the insurance. She had to insist that every single piece of work that she'd ever had done was fully documented and certificated... to avoid paying the paltry insurance premium.

 

[ChipFanDave]

As I've mentioned on this illustrious forum before... it is considered 'normal' practice for indemnity insurance to be taken out by the vendor, regardless of whether or not they have certificates/warranties/inspections etc.

In fact, I was chatting to a client only yesterday about her recent house sale & purchase and her solicitor was almost demanding that she take out the insurance. She had to insist that every single piece of work that she'd ever had done was fully documented and certificated... to avoid paying the paltry insurance premium.

We we moved four years ago the solicitor then took about £15 for an indemnity insurance against such things. I'm surprised that there isn't a company going round looking to monetise this, as it looks like a home run for a few clued up solicitors and an unscrupulousness electrical contractor. There must be millions of homes out there without properly notified work covered by these policies.
[automerge]1595702618[/automerge]
In fact in the words of Michael Cane "Hang on lads, I've got a great idea" !

 

[Midwest]

As I've mentioned on this illustrious forum before... it is considered 'normal' practice for indemnity insurance to be taken out by the vendor, regardless of whether or not they have certificates/warranties/inspections etc.

In fact, I was chatting to a client only yesterday about her recent house sale & purchase and her solicitor was almost demanding that she take out the insurance. She had to insist that every single piece of work that she'd ever had done was fully documented and certificated... to avoid paying the paltry insurance premium.

Indemnity insurance only indemnified you from legal action, not rectifying works. Time limit for your LBC taking action is two years.