remedial work after EICR.

[Alan Landlord]

hi i had an EICR report done for a property i let. It had a number of C1 and C2 observations. I got a different electrician to come in and correct these as well as replace my old fuse board to a consumer unit.

Following the work, he is giving me 2 additional C2 observations that were not in my EICR report (which was only done 6 months ago).

1. earth cable is 6 mm and does not meet regulation
2. cooker hood and one socket in kitchen are spurred from cooker socket. He wants to run them directly back to consumer unit.

Cost of these 2 jobs is £225. Do i need to do them? Neither appear on my EICR report and i now have an upto date consumer unit.

 

[UNG]

It has become fairly standard in theatres to have EICRs carried out annually with 1/3 of the installation looked at each year as a kind of 3 year rolling process.

So every 3 years the whole installation is checked as more of a PPM process rather than a standard EICR, testing like that is similar to quarterly fire alarm testing where over the 4 quarters every detector is operated meeting the 12 month requirement

The domestic EICR can be a lottery as to what is tested and inspected every 5 years with the some parts checked regularly and some parts that are never checked for many years or only found when a fault occurs. This is one of the grey areas of EICR's IMO that the limits can be set to suit the inspector without the person ordering the EICR understanding what they are actually agreeing to

 

[Pretty Mouth]

His words are "Main Earth , gas earth and water earth are only 6mm and dont meet regulations. "
Honestly, i dont care, they are not on my EICR report, so why should i do anything.

Hi Alan,

It's impossible for us to say whether your electrician's judgement is correct or not in this instance, but let's assume that he is, and a potentially dangerous situation exists.

I believe you as a landlord still have a duty to ensure that the safety standards are met, regardless of whether it's been identified in the EICR or not, and particularly as your 2nd electrician has brought it to your attention.

See the legislation linked to below, points 3.-(1).

It seems you are expected to meet the safety standards, AND have an EICR, not BY having an EICR.

The Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020

These Regulations impose duties on private landlords of residential premises in England in respect of electrical safety standards. The duties do not apply to landlords of social housing. The Regulations require local housing authorities to enforce the duties, and include a power to arrange...

www.legislation.gov.uk

 

[timhoward]

I'm certainly not very impressed with the reported sequence of events - remedials, extra work agreed to change the board, and then saying 'by the way the earthing and bonding is undersized'. If the installation wasn't in a fit state to be modified he shouldn't have changed the board.
This doesn't help me instantly fully trust the new proclamations, but I do take the point (and agree) that they shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

If it were me I'd be inclined to conclude contractual obligations and say "Please put in writing any defects that you have observed during the course of conducting this work".
While this is getting a bit like the infamous gas-cooker sketch, you could then get further advice regarding anything the electrician is willing to state in writing, maybe from the original person who did the EICR.

 

[Dartlec]

And this is the big problem with a limited inspection

Although I don't think when you take the cover off a CU you can say you only actually inspected 33% of it, or you only checked 33% of the screws for tightness

While I will work to a 50% level when doing an EICR if my alarm bells start ringing due to suspect readings or poor installation methods I will dig deeper to make sure I miss nothing that will cause problems and come back to bite me, I take the view that any EICR could turn into a court case if someone is hurt or becomes a fatality and then how do you explain to the court that the %age you inspected and tested wasn't part of the %age that caused the injury or fatality, I would rather be thorough and make a bit less money than cut corners

Personally, I think there are two issues that often get confused with domestic EICRs.

IMO the box that says "extent of the electrical installation" should always cover 100% of circuits on a domestic EICR, unless there is a very good reason and it's listed as an operational limitation. Even if a circuit has to remain live during an inspection, it can still be part of the report, with OPCD, cable size, and Zs taken after all.

There is then the separate issue of how many accessories on each circuit you might remove to check wiring - and that should be noted too.

I think ESF have given some guidance on that, though I can't find it at the moment, but it's something like 1-2 accessories per circuit.

Of course, if the first two you remove have issues (for example missing earths to metal plates), then that should ideally be extended as necessary.

 

[Other_Tucker]

It has become fairly standard in theatres to have EICRs carried out annually with 1/3 of the installation looked at each year as a kind of 3 year rolling process.

If 1/3 of the installation had to be checked 5 years ago, it would have been the easiest and most accessible 1/3. 5 years on the next inspector will of course check the same easily accessible 1/3

 

[UNG]

If 1/3 of the installation had to be checked 5 years ago, it would have been the easiest and most accessible 1/3. 5 years on the next inspector will of course check the same easily accessible 1/3

Did you not read the post you quoted!!!

 

[DMElec.1]

The OSG is a guide, not the regulations.

But when it's not on site it is still the on-site guide, it's so confusing