Sorry I clearly upset you but to answer the 2nd part of your message with regards to maintenance and upkeep on properties with rental income. If it’s your property in question then surely the rent covers your mortgage? With the capital investment do you mean spending money to maintain the property when things go wrong? Think that also applies to your 3rd point of property management surely if it’s your property you have to expect to pay out £££ to keep it habitable and safe for tenants. Same applies to homeowners when things go wrong or need upgrading got to pay the costs.
I am in no way upset but your attitude appears to be landlords are making a lot of money so you will happily relieve them of some of it for totally unnecessary work to upgrade their rental properties electrical installations every few years as the regs change or are amended so should a homeowner be expected to do the same.
If you look at it from a different angle the EICR you carry out is ultimately paid for by the tenant, if the installation using your methods needs updating to meet the latest regs or amendment every couple of years the tenant will ultimately pay for it with an increased rent
The capital investment is the buying (either outright or with a mortgage) and any refurbishment of the property prior to letting it out, the maintenance, certifications, insurances and letting agents costs are annual expenses. With the capital investment is normal for a landlord to want a return on that investment otherwise the money could have been left in the bank although it is difficult to make much return on deposited money at the moment
Having seen some landlords loose a lot of money because a tenants idea of habitable is something akin to a pig sty and the landlord then having to spend £000's refurbing before it can be let again at the market rent for the area it can take a good while before there is any return on the cash the landlord has invested.
To use any comparison to a homeowner and the maintenance of their personal property has no relevance in this conversation in my opinion as they are two totally different cost models
That’s irrelevant I’ve been made out to be disgraceful for recommending consumer unit change when I don’t charge no where near the amount that is charged by most sparks £350 plus vat. Actually I’ll tell you I will change a standard consumer for £200 labour but before I upgrade if any faults Or unsatisfactory results arise after change that will be bit extra what about you?
Is the fact you are cheaper than other sparks any justification for the change of a consumer unit on an EICR
So at £200 + materials you are not that much cheaper if at all when compared to £350 + vat all in.
Ah right well I get “slagged off” for recommending consumer unit upgrades and it seems like you took it personally when I said it’s disgraceful for amount some sparks charge for couple hours work. Well next time you’re in South Wales (valleys) let me know and we can have a tidy chat over a pint hopefully ? ?
Ahh another case of misinterpretation again, at what point were you "slagged off" isn't it amazing how some take constructive criticism of their methods or interpretations to heart
The problem is that electricians are expected to apply the standards uniformly, imagine the backlash from the rental sector if the electrical industry said only an installation compliant with the 18th edition was acceptable on an EICR for a rental property or any property for that matter it would make a lot of properties unrentable or unsaleable overnight and create a lot of negative publicity with electricians being tagged rip off merchants when the installation is still considered good for continued use