Queries regarding Inspection Report I've just had completed

[Butch]

Hi,
My first post so please go gentle on me!

I had an Inspection Report (EICR) completed on my house a week a go. It failed on two items:
1) Gap at the back of sockets in the utility (which I knew about, I meant to screw these down, but I only put them up loosely as I knew I had to take them down to plasterboard the wall at some point) - C1.
2) Excess copper showing - C2.

There is a comment on the report that the electrician was unable to complete the DEAD testing due to poor state of connections in the Consumer Unit even though the consumer unit did not fail the report.

The electrician is asking to be paid the full amount for the inspection even though as he states himself he was unable to complete the work. I assumed once I had resolved the C1 and C2 and CU connections (whatever he meant by that as he hasn't explained), that he would continue with the DEAD testing which would have been paid as part of the first invoice, however, he is advising that a full inspection would need to be carried out again at the full cost.

So, firstly, I am struggling to understand why he couldn't carry out the DEAD testing even when the CU didn't fail the test, was this a convenience thing as he stated on the report incorrect termination of neutral and earth conductors into their corresponding bars?

Secondly, once the C1 and c2 have been rectified, is it normal practice to do a complete test again or just re-check the failed items?

Does anybody know how long it takes to perform a DEAD test?

Also, the certificate he has issued has "This is not a valid certificate/report. This is a preview only" written all over it, making it difficult to read, again is this normal, will he issue the valid one when I have paid him?

I have gone back to the electrician with queries but it is almost like he can't be bothered to explain anything, I've asked him for locations of various things but he is very vague in his responses. Just wondered if this is normal practice.

 

[SparkyChick]

Welcome to the forums.

I take the view the job isn't complete until the full certificate has been issued as that is what you've paid for.

Unless it's seriously bad, I wouldn't expect to complete a new inspection. I would issue certificates for the work carried out, but you wouldn't get a certificate that says satisfactory at the end of it. You'd have the unsatisfactory and certificates covering the work carried out to correct the issues.

Can you post a copy of the report (with identifying information removed) and possibly pictures of what it is he's saying require attention? Obviously only take pictures if it's safe to do so.

 

[littlespark]

Its an EICR, basically a REPORT... its not a CERTIFICATE. Its not a case of a pass or a fail.
Its there to tell you, the customer, the condition of the installation and that some things may need attended to.
Whether you get them done or not is up to you.

That said, is the EICR been arranged so you can sell the property, or rent it out? In which case any dangerous faults would need repaired, with a test certificate that supercedes the remarks made in the EICR.

The only thing I can think of with the CU is it being a really old fusebox where the terminal screw heads have sheared off - meaning he cannot disconnect anything to do the testing properly.

The guy isn't being very professional saying he has to do another full test at full price again. That's just extracting the urine.

 

[FatAlan]

This is where I think people get upset and confused over EICRs as they are a report on the condition of an installation at a point in time.
Probably comes down to the actual agreement between the spark and customer and what the customers reqirements are. As SC above and I’m sure you’ll get some good pointers from the experienced sparks on here.

 

[Butch]

Hi, thanks for a quick response...

I wasn't sure if you wanted the entire report or just the bits where the electrician has made his comments and the list of failures, I've provided the latter but if you want me to post the full report I can do.

 

[AJshep]

Before I carry out a EICR I always agree the extent of limitations with the client.

Im not sure why the electrician didn't carry out the dead tests if this was agreed. When the consumer unit is in a bad state I usally do ring continuity at a socket outlet.
Once the remedial work is you would be expected to recieve a EIC ( which covers the corrected work) and a covering letter which states the installation is now in satisfactory condition.
I wouldnt expect to pay for a EICR twice.
But Its easy to comment on this without seeing the reports.

 

[Butch]

Hi to all that have responded and thanks...

AJshep...you have said exactly what I would have expected, however, what if I carried out the remedial work myself, would this make a difference to getting it tested, would the remedial work and only the remedial work need checking or would it require an entire check again?

 

[MFS Electrical]

There are ways in which the dead testing can be carried out even when the terminations aren’t in their appropriate location as AJ said RFC can be done from a socket rather than the board and a global R1+R2 test can be achieved by isolating the DB and putting a jumper from the busbar to the earth bar then switching each MCB to the on position 1 at a time while the Main switch is obviously locked off then obtaining the readings it’s not hard and actually causes less disruption and is less likely to introduce faults than disconnecting one circuit at a time.

 

[SparkyChick]

This is my take on the points raised.... Firstly, did you agree the limitations with him before hand?

Items....

1. C3 is fine, won't result in unsatisfactory
2. C3 is fine, won't result in unsatisfactory, however if that's the only reason he didn't do dead testing... he's a muppet
3, 4, 5 - I think one C3 would have been enough for the lack of labelling. Fairly common problem on older installs
6 - Guessing this is CPC sleeving... again, fairly common on older installs not to find any
7, 9, 10, 11 - Personally, I don't think these need to be listed as for existing installations this should usually be a limitation on the entire report. What I find quite interesting though is 16. He's obviously looked at enough to establish that in his opinion there is an excess of junction boxes (which are usually tucked away in the fabric of the build). However... this isn't strictly against the regulations. Being unable to access them for inspection purposes is (if they are screw type) but providing they are well terminated, an excess is not a breach of the regulations, it's just not good practice
12 - If I come across situations like that, I simply re-terminate and comment on a continuation page. It takes hardly any time.
13 - Did he say where?
14 - Loose accessories, justifies a comment
15 - Valid point
17 - I can't read

It's interesting he makes the point about knockout boxes and exposed live parts but doesn't list the junction box in the loft with no cover on it, just a comment.

At the very minimum, he could have conducted a global IR test on the whole installation. Would have been better than nothing, or could have pulled the fuses and just carried out a 250v L-E test for each circuit and then possibly a global N-E test and possibly even a by circuit L-N test (with all other neutrals connected). There are ways and means of getting some results if you're intent on doing the best job you can. I would caveat those results on a continuation page.

Please note.. these are my opinions only based solely on the content of the report.

 

[telectrix]

if i was diong the report, any problems that could be resovled without major work would br fixed.

 

[Butch]

Hi Littlespark, just read your post.

No not selling or anything like that, I had an extension several years ago and it needs to be signed off (building Regs). Part of the sign off is getting the electrics signed off (which I did myself).

The consumer unit is about 5 years old (if that), I 'think' reading the inspection report that the issue was the neutral and earth conductors should have been in some kind of order, I'm assuming this would make it easier to carry out the DEAD tests, I'm just guessing as I have no idea what they are .

 

[MFS Electrical]

Hi to all that have responded and thanks...

AJshep...you have said exactly what I would have expected, however, what if I carried out the remedial work myself, would this make a difference to getting it tested, would the remedial work and only the remedial work need checking or would it require an entire check again?

That’s a fair point technically you wouldn’t need an EICR again. But you will need some sort of certificate to supersede it such as an EIC or Minor Works cert and you’d struggle to get any spark to make up a very for work he/she hadn’t done. If you decide to fix the remedials yourself your only option may well be another EICR. I recommend you use a different spark look for one who is 2394/5, 2391 or 2391-52 qualified though. They are much more likely to be able to effectively test your property fully as their competence has been assessed in inspection and testing

 

[SparkyChick]

Hi to all that have responded and thanks...

AJshep...you have said exactly what I would have expected, however, what if I carried out the remedial work myself, would this make a difference to getting it tested, would the remedial work and only the remedial work need checking or would it require an entire check again?

The issue is that when we carry out work, test and issue certificates we're taking responsibility for the work. This is where a lot of DIYers don't get it.

You do some work, I come along test it and issue a minor works certificate. If it goes wrong down the line, I'm liable. So, to be blunt, if you wanted to carry out the remedial work, I'd expect to do a full EICR again, I won't certify someone one elses work unless it's through the third party certification scheme (which isn't really meant for minor works as far as I can tell).

 

[AJshep]

I agree with Sparkychick on this point.

Butch can I ask have you carried out electrical work yourself prior to getting a EICR done ?

 

[Butch]

I agree with Sparkychick on this point.

Butch can I ask have you carried out electrical work yourself prior to getting a EICR done ?

Yes, I had an extension to the house (had the shell built), I did everything else, central heating (obviously not the boiler), electrics, kitchen install etc...

 

[AJshep]

Yes, I had an extension to the house (had the shell built), I did everything else, central heating (obviously not the boiler), electrics, kitchen install etc...

Ok these situations are akward for electricians, if the electrical work has been carried out to a poor standard we often face upset from the customer and risk of not being paid. I'll be honest sometimes its just easier to not except these jobs.

So I'm not trying to be disrespectful, and I have not seen the work, however the best advice I can give is for you to either contact the original electrician and come to an agreement or seek the advice of a new electrician, be honest about the work you have carried out before they visit and be prepared to except that some of the things you may have done may need to be corrected to get a satisfactory report.

Your much more likley to get an Electrician work with you if deal with this potentially akward situation first.

 

[Darkwood]

I do think there is issue with how the inspection was carried out here although many relevant points have also been raised in this thread, unless the installation is wired in singles then I see no issue with doing dead tests regardless of the N/E connection order, it seems like a lazy attitude not to do the tests then put them back in the correct order.
I agree the EICR is a report on the installation as it stands but some issues can simply be resolved by the inspector if they go in with a professional attitude to start with.
I also am confused about the numerous joint box comment, unless these are somehow impeding the safety of the installation then there is nothing wrong with it, every electrical point in your house is technically a joint anyway.
I see within this thread that we have 2 issues, the OP's misinterpretation as to what an EICR is and what seems to be an unprofessional approach by the Electrician who could have carried out the dead tests (unless they were all in singles) by simply following the live wire to the common cable to test the N/E.

Any limitations in the report as already mentioned should have been discussed prior or during the testing, if you were not present then at a convenient point before the report was written then at least you would have been fully informed before the report was issued.

 

[Butch]

The issue is that when we carry out work, test and issue certificates we're taking responsibility for the work. This is where a lot of DIYers don't get it.

You do some work, I come along test it and issue a minor works certificate. If it goes wrong down the line, I'm liable. So, to be blunt, if you wanted to carry out the remedial work, I'd expect to do a full EICR again, I won't certify someone one elses work unless it's through the third party certification scheme (which isn't really meant for minor works as far as I can tell).

I totally get that, as per Building Regs, if a qualified person does the work they issue a BS7671, if a non-qualified person carries out the work they appoint a qualified person to perform an inspection report.

What I don't get, if an electrician carried out the C1 and C2 issues (although I'm reluctant to pay someone just for tightening sockets (c1), there wouldn't be a need to carry out a complete test again, however, If I did the remedial work for C1 and c2 the whole test would need to be carried out again, why can't the c1 and c2 just be checked again...I'm guessing it can, but I think like you stated before, I would probably find it difficult to get a DIFFERENT electrician to come out for just that, however, shouldn't it be okay for the original electrician to just check the c1 and c2 failures again rather than entire test (thats what I can't get my head round).

 

[Darkwood]

I will add if there are minor easily resolvable issues raised in any test I did I would give the home owner the opportunity to correct them or do them myself before issuing the report, I find this to be a good professional attitude and good for customer relations and business sense... I wouldn't put an unsatisfactory on a report for an issue that may take less than a minute to resolve, I would simply do it and inform the customer that I carried out some corrective measures.

 

[The Ghost]

When the incorrectly terminated earths etc. are mentioned, it means there are numbers on the earth bar and the neutral bar. Each circuit is numerically assigned to the numbers on the bars and the postion of the circuit breaker. So 1st MCB Live, then N. and E. to 1 on the corresponding bars. The only time I really have a problem with that is in commercial installations. They usually have single cables coming in and it can be interesting finding out which single belongs to its corresponding single. In your case you have no doubt twin and earth cable so it is easy to see which belongs to which. So in not so many words, it is lazy of him not to do the dead tests for that reason. Limitations have to be agreed with the person ordering the work, prior, to beginning the inspection. It seems you agreed to this according to his report?

 

[The Ghost]

By the by, I notice estate agents and Landlords are tending to get an EICR then any remedial work done by another electrician. This stops anyone being over zealous in their fault finding.

 

[Butch]

Ok these situations are akward for electricians, if the electrical work has been carried out to a poor standard we often face upset from the customer and risk of not being paid. I'll be honest sometimes its just easier to not except these jobs.

So I'm not trying to be disrespectful, and I have not seen the work, however the best advice I can give is for you to either contact the original electrician and come to an agreement or seek the advice of a new electrician, be honest about the work you have carried out before they visit and be prepared to except that some of the things you may have done may need to be corrected to get a satisfactory report.

Your much more likley to get an Electrician work with you if deal with this potentially akward situation first.

Totally agree and good advice...when I rang several electricians for quotes I did specifically state that I had an extension to the house, and that the electrics consisted of the original house wiring and the new that I had done myself, I was told by one that they couldn't certify it as they hadn't carried out the work themselves (which I completely understood and perfectly logical) and they said that they could carry out an inspection report instead which building regs said was perfectly acceptable.

 

[Butch]

When the incorrectly terminated earths etc. are mentioned, it means there are numbers on the earth bar and the neutral bar. Each circuit is numerically assigned to the numbers on the bars and the postion of the circuit breaker. So 1st MCB Live, then N. and E. to 1 on the corresponding bars. The only time I really have a problem with that is in commercial installations. They usually have single cables coming in and it can be interesting finding out which single belongs to its corresponding single. In your case you have no doubt twin and earth cable so it is easy to see which belongs to which. So in not so many words, it is lazy of him not to do the dead tests for that reason. Limitations have to be agreed with the person ordering the work, prior, to beginning the inspection. It seems you agreed to this according to his report?

Hi Vortigern, thanks for your advice, no, nothing was agreed before hand other than for him to "carry out an Inspection report on the electrics in my house" which he quoted as a standard charge for a medium sized house. So my assumption was that I was paying for the work involved in carrying out an Inspection Report, nothing else was mentioned, no caveats or anything. I finished work early so I was there if he needed to see anything, I had pics of the wiring etc before I plasterboarded over them, I could lift floor boards etc for him if he wanted me too, I also thought I needed to be there so he could show me where (if any) the issues/concerns he had but nope, he said he didn't need me to be there which I thought was a bit odd especially in light of there being issues and me having to email him to ask where and what happens next and he hasn't been very forthcoming with any information.

 

[Butch]

Guys, you have been fantastic in your responses and really appreciate the time and effort you have taken to respond, so to summarize, I'm guessing that....

1) He should have carried out the DEAD testing and therefore I am being fair in holding back a small amount of the total invoice? (although I'm not sure how much as I don't know how long it takes to carry out DEAD testing)?

2) I should expect to pay for a full EICR again if I carry out the remedial works whether the original electrician carries out the report or a different electrician?

 

[Pete999]

Guys, you have been fantastic in your responses and really appreciate the time and effort you have taken to respond, so to summarize, I'm guessing that....

1) He should have carried out the DEAD testing and therefore I am being fair in holding back a small amount of the total invoice? (although I'm not sure how much as I don't know how long it takes to carry out DEAD testing)?

2) I should expect to pay for a full EICR again if I carry out the remedial works whether the original electrician carries out the report or a different electrician?

Was this Electrician a registered Electrician ( was he a member of any of the Competent Persons Schemes CPS, NICEIC, NAPIT etc)? if he was, and if you aren't satisfied with the service he provided, you could always try contacting the CPS he belongs to, there will be some that say this is a waste of time, but if you don't try you'll never know, and in my opinion, regardless of the state of the installation in your house, he could have completed the EICR, with caveats on the stuff he said he couldn't do, and issued a certificate to that effect.
Advice if it was me, I would get another Electrician in to give you a quotation for a new EICR with remedial work included, anything that is of major concern ought to be noted and reported to you, to give you the chance to agree a price, for the work extra to the EICR, sorry for the long winded reply, good luck, this is my take on your problems, others will differ I' sure.

 

[Butch]

Hi Pete999, again thanks for the info, yes he is a member of the NICEIC, I've contacted the Citizens Advice Bureau (still waiting for response after 5 days ..lol) but not the governing body he belongs to, so that's a good idea, however I'm approaching his deadline of 7 days to pay the invoice, then I'm hit with a 10% penalty charge according to what the invoice states, although I'm not sure if this is even legally binding, however, I do want to pay him for the work he has done, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Pete999]

Hi Pete999, again thanks for the info, yes he is a member of the NICEIC, I've contacted the Citizens Advice Bureau (still waiting for response after 5 days ..lol) but not the governing body he belongs to, so that's a good idea, however I'm approaching his deadline of 7 days to pay the invoice, then I'm hit with a 10% penalty charge according to what the invoice states, although I'm not sure if this is even legally binding, however, I do want to pay him for the work he has done, nothing more, nothing less.

A difficult one Butch, I don't know the legalities, but if you continue to talk to the CAB and the NICEIC, then copy the Electrician in question as well, this may result in a reaction from the Electrician in question, but it may/should act as a resolution should you, or more importantly the Electrician, should he invoke the payment within 7 day clause on the invoice. I'm sure any attempt to invoke this clause by the Electrician will be looked on favorably, by any resulting court case, be open in all your correspondence to all parties, again good luck, the convening authorities don't like little people, you in this instance (no offence) getting shafted, hope it all goes well.

 

[Butch]

This is my take on the points raised.... Firstly, did you agree the limitations with him before hand?

Items....

1. C3 is fine, won't result in unsatisfactory
2. C3 is fine, won't result in unsatisfactory, however if that's the only reason he didn't do dead testing... he's a muppet
3, 4, 5 - I think one C3 would have been enough for the lack of labelling. Fairly common problem on older installs
6 - Guessing this is CPC sleeving... again, fairly common on older installs not to find any
7, 9, 10, 11 - Personally, I don't think these need to be listed as for existing installations this should usually be a limitation on the entire report. What I find quite interesting though is 16. He's obviously looked at enough to establish that in his opinion there is an excess of junction boxes (which are usually tucked away in the fabric of the build). However... this isn't strictly against the regulations. Being unable to access them for inspection purposes is (if they are screw type) but providing they are well terminated, an excess is not a breach of the regulations, it's just not good practice
12 - If I come across situations like that, I simply re-terminate and comment on a continuation page. It takes hardly any time.
13 - Did he say where?
14 - Loose accessories, justifies a comment
15 - Valid point
17 - I can't read

It's interesting he makes the point about knockout boxes and exposed live parts but doesn't list the junction box in the loft with no cover on it, just a comment.

At the very minimum, he could have conducted a global IR test on the whole installation. Would have been better than nothing, or could have pulled the fuses and just carried out a 250v L-E test for each circuit and then possibly a global N-E test and possibly even a by circuit L-N test (with all other neutrals connected). There are ways and means of getting some results if you're intent on doing the best job you can. I would caveat those results on a continuation page.

Please note.. these are my opinions only based solely on the content of the report.

Thank you very very much for taking time for a very informative response.

I've spoken to the electrician in question and tried to clarify what we needed to do to get a 'satisfactory'. I asked him if it would be cheaper for him to carry out the remedial works (c1 and c2) and therefore (if I'm understanding correctly, no requirement to perform another full EICR or if I carried out the remedial work and he then perform a full EICR again.

His response is never clear, he first advised that he wouldn't be able to do the work until after Xmas, he then started going on about downlights in the loft, I then said I'm talking about the C1 and C2 work not the C3's as I thought they were just recommendations and have no effect on whether a report gains a satisfactory or unsatisfactory. He responded that as far as he was aware all issues on the report had to be remedied but he advised me to check with building regs (uh?!).

I then stated that I was still struggling to understand why I needed to pay the full amount when originally he advised that the work would take aprox 3 hrs and he was only actually here for two because he couldn't carry out the dead testing due to the state of the CU and that he still had to go home and do the report and because it was so bad it took him longer than usual, he said it wouldn't be very nice if he rang me up and said the report is taking him longer than usual because of the state of things which he had to keep checking with NICEIC. When I said he could have still performed the dead testing another way he asked me how he could have done that!

In addition, I asked him why the certificate had "This is not a valid certificate/report" pre-printed all over it and apparently he said he sent me the wrong one...boy am I confused!!

I don't know whether I am dealing with somebody who is just trying to make my life as difficult as possible because I decided to do the electrics myself or whether he just isn't very good, even though out of 60 reviews he has 9.9/10, that's why I hired him.

 

[Pete999]

Thank you very very much for taking time for a very informative response.

I've spoken to the electrician in question and tried to clarify what we needed to do to get a 'satisfactory'. I asked him if it would be cheaper for him to carry out the remedial works (c1 and c2) and therefore (if I'm understanding correctly, no requirement to perform another full EICR or if I carried out the remedial work and he then perform a full EICR again.

His response is never clear, he first advised that he wouldn't be able to do the work until after Xmas, he then started going on about downlights in the loft, I then said I'm talking about the C1 and C2 work not the C3's as I thought they were just recommendations and have no effect on whether a report gains a satisfactory or unsatisfactory. He responded that as far as he was aware all issues on the report had to be remedied but he advised me to check with building regs (uh?!).

I then stated that I was still struggling to understand why I needed to pay the full amount when originally he advised that the work would take aprox 3 hrs and he was only actually here for two because he couldn't carry out the dead testing due to the state of the CU and that he still had to go home and do the report and because it was so bad it took him longer than usual, he said it wouldn't be very nice if he rang me up and said the report is taking him longer than usual because of the state of things which he had to keep checking with NICEIC. When I said he could have still performed the dead testing another way he asked me how he could have done that!

In addition, I asked him why the certificate had "This is not a valid certificate/report" pre-printed all over it and apparently he said he sent me the wrong one...boy am I confused!!

I don't know whether I am dealing with somebody who is just trying to make my life as difficult as possible because I decided to do the electrics myself or whether he just isn't very good, even though out of 60 reviews he has 9.9/10, that's why I hired him.

Butch, having not seen your installation, from your post it would seem as though this particular chap is not being very helpful.
It also seem as though he is as you say decided to punish you for sying you will do the work yourself.
I think you need to bite the bullet, rethink your strategy, maybe contact the NICEIC and ask them to recommend an Electrician, who could undertake the report you require, this way you would in my opinion, have some sort or recourse if the work goes knockers up.

 

[Rpa07]

59 members of the family and himself - his nan probably marked him down a point!
No one has asked the price of the invoice. Sounds like If it isn’t an obtuse amount, then to get him out of your hair, pay it then get another spark to quote the remedials and discuss the dead tests and a resulting satisfactory certificate.

 

[telectrix]

i'd be interested to see what he had charged for the report. that could shed ( don't mention shed supplkies on TT) some light on how intensive the report was.

 

[SparkyChick]

Thank you very very much for taking time for a very informative response.

I've spoken to the electrician in question and tried to clarify what we needed to do to get a 'satisfactory'. I asked him if it would be cheaper for him to carry out the remedial works (c1 and c2) and therefore (if I'm understanding correctly, no requirement to perform another full EICR or if I carried out the remedial work and he then perform a full EICR again.

There is no requirement to carry out another EICR. Remedial works carried out by a person who is competent to issue the required certificates for works (minor works, electrical installation as appropriate) and/or a report outlining why no changes were required or what was done (some works may not require a minor works certificate - fixing accessories for example) are sufficient to address an unsatisfactory report.

His response is never clear, he first advised that he wouldn't be able to do the work until after Xmas, he then started going on about downlights in the loft, I then said I'm talking about the C1 and C2 work not the C3's as I thought they were just recommendations and have no effect on whether a report gains a satisfactory or unsatisfactory. He responded that as far as he was aware all issues on the report had to be remedied but he advised me to check with building regs (uh?!).

Building regs have nothing to do with BS 7671 (the wiring regulations - which govern how an electrical installation condition report [EICR] is carried out). Basically he is full of it. Only items classed as C1 (danger present), C2 (possible danger - something else has to happen for it to be dangerous) and FI (further investigation) items warrant an unsatisfactory result and as such are the only items that must be addressed.

I don't know whether I am dealing with somebody who is just trying to make my life as difficult as possible because I decided to do the electrics myself or whether he just isn't very good, even though out of 60 reviews he has 9.9/10, that's why I hired him.

As has been said, depending on the site, the reviews may mean absolutely nothing.

 

[Butch]

Pete/Rpa07 - agreed, I'm going to pay him the full amount just for closure. It's very frustrating dealing with him because his responses never seem to make sense...probably won't be a lot of money to you guys, the invoice is for £192 (incl vat) for inspection report, as I say, it's not so much the money, it's the fact he's still charging the full amount when he only carried out 2/3rds of the work.

 

[Butch]

i'd be interested to see what he had charged for the report. that could shed ( don't mention shed supplkies on TT) some light on how intensive the report was.

Hi Telectrix...the original quote for an Inspection Report was £160 + vat, this was about £20 cheaper than other quotes I had to carry out an Inspection report on a medium sized house.

 

[SparkyChick]

If you said he was there for 2-3 hours, that's an outrageous amount of money. I'm doing one this week, I plan on being there around 5-6 hours and I'll be charging less than what you're being charged.

 

[Butch]

If you said he was there for 2-3 hours, that's an outrageous amount of money. I'm doing one this week, I plan on being there around 5-6 hours and I'll be charging less than what you're being charged.

LOL...well I've been well and truly ripped off, he originally advised the work would take aprox 3hrs to complete the Inspection report, as it transpired, he shot off an hour early as he couldn't complete the DEAD testing due to the order of the conductors in the CU, he arrived at 12:40 and was gone by 14:40...£192 for two hours work, not a bad hourly rate if you can get it. I think my GP is on less than that!!

 

[buzzlightyear]

No not selling or anything like that, I had an extension several years ago and it needs to be signed off (building Regs). Part of the sign off is getting the electrics signed off (which I did myself).

LOL...well I've been well and truly ripped off, he originally advised the work would take aprox 3hrs to complete the Inspection report, as it transpired, he shot off an hour early as he couldn't complete the DEAD testing due to the order of the conductors in the CU, he arrived at 12:40 and was gone by 14:40...£192 for two hours work, not a bad hourly rate if you can get it. I think my GP is on less than that

Pete/Rpa07 - agreed, I'm going to pay him the full amount just for closure. It's very frustrating dealing with him because his responses never seem to make sense...probably won't be a lot of money to you guys, the invoice is for £192 (incl vat) for inspection report, as I say, it's not so much the money, it's the fact he's still charging the full amount when he only carried out 2/3rds of the work.

my my, and you complain that .god give me strength .have butchers. maybe you over stepped your mark .

 

[Strima]

So he couldn't do dead testing as the conductors were in the wrong order in the board?

 

[Butch]

my my, and you complain that .god give me strength .have butchers. maybe you over stepped your mark .

Ah I see, the customer should pay up because it isn't a great deal of money even though the guy hasn't actually completed the work...yeah, I've got bags of money to give away, feel free to come and rip me off!

So if a mechanic carried out a full service on your car, quoted you £192, but couldn't change the spark plugs because he couldn't get them off you would still pay the full amount would you?

If you read the forum, as I said before, it's not the amount of money it's the principle, I wouldn't charge somebody 3hrs work when I only did 2hrs.

 

[Butch]

So he couldn't do dead testing as the conductors were in the wrong order in the board?

Hi Strima - yes, correct, summary report states "live test only due to the poor state of connections in the consumer unit and incorrect terminations of neutral and earth conductors into their corresponding bars. No dead tests were carried out"...I have no idea what he means by poor state, he has not explained and there is nothing on the 'observations and recommendations for action' report regarding the 'poor state'.