what is the law on testing

[krishcanag]

Hi

I was interested to find out the law on testing an installation done by another installer.

Now I know no one in the right mind would approve an install if its totally not visable (cliped to wall) which will never be the case. But there are companies that have approval from councils to go in and test either DIY or unregistered installers without full details of the install and no doubt will put in limitations to cover themselves, so could a qualified sparky actually go test and approve if he thinks its good and put in limitations?

Is there a demand by councils requesting such checks or is it more or less the odd case?

KC

 

[needasparks]

Think you will find what the council will accept differs from what a governing body would.

 

[krishcanag]

Could you expand on this please

Think you will find what the council will accept differs from what a governing body would.

 

[wallyanker]

I wouldnt test someone elses install and put my name to it as if I had installed it, however, I would be prepared to do a full PIR on it.

 

[Richard Burns]

If you inspect and test a new installation and complete an electrical installation certificate for that installation, you are now committing yourself to responsibility for any defects, faults or subsequent problems that occur.
You would be liable with no recourse to anyone else for any legal action that followed.

If there is a new installation that needs checking then an EICR can be done on that installation; this would have defined extent and limitations on the form and thereby exempt you from liability for anything that you could not check. It would also not have your signature as responsible for the design, construction, inspection and testing.

 

[needasparks]

Could you expand on this please

As Richard said.
some councils will accept a PIR (EICR) which as you know is not the same thing. I've heard this a few times when they can't be bothered with the aggro. Some are to the letter of the law and others just let someone else test it.

 

[1shortcircuit]

Why would you want to test and certify somebody else's work?

Even if you checked for cable routes with a detector to confirm they are in safe zones there is nothing to say that the cable csa is the same throughout.

The longer people certify other peoples work, the longer they will continue to do the work themselves. If they don't want to pay a spark then that's fine, they have the option of using the Local Authority Building Control for a smallish fee. IF THEY DO NOT WANT TO DO THIS THEN IT MAKES YOU WONDER WHY??? WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???

:thumbsup

 

[needasparks]

Why would you want to test and certify somebody else's work?


The longer people certify other peoples work, the longer they will continue to do the work themselves.

:thumbsup

Think your preaching to the converted on here.

Back to the OP, I heard the NIC prosecuted two for it last year. struck off and £20k fine.
Its only a £5k fine if Building control find out you did it yourself so I guess its going to go on for a while yet.

 

[1shortcircuit]

Think your preaching to the converted on here.

Perhaps the OP knows of my local builder lol

 

[D80]

I wouldnt test someone elses install and put my name to it as if I had installed it, however, I would be prepared to do a full PIR on it.

That's exactly what I would do as well. Did a little bit of work for a couple of London councils when I was over there, they where happy enough with a PIR. That said they would probably have been happy enough with a bit of toilet roll signed - they didn't seem to have much of a clue about anything!

 

[The Ranger]

If you inspect and test a new installation and complete an electrical installation certificate for that installation, you are now committing yourself to responsibility for any defects, faults or subsequent problems that occur.
You would be liable with no recourse to anyone else for any legal action that followed.

If there is a new installation that needs checking then an EICR can be done on that installation; this would have defined extent and limitations on the form and thereby exempt you from liability for anything that you could not check. It would also not have your signature as responsible for the design, construction, inspection and testing.

Sorry but I Don't agree
Defects comes down to contractual arrangements
faults and problems is a bit wooly to say the least

Having worked in a test team for both CHT, BBESL and MJN couldsons it is not uncommon to test someone else's work and also i will stand by the fact that a test is only as good as the moment it is done!

 

[Farmelectrics]

What's the difference because once you do a eicr you've took the responsibilty for that report I would have no problem carrying out testing on some ones work if it all complys with bs7671 then there's no problem

 

[D80]

Sorry but I Don't agree
Defects comes down to contractual arrangements
faults and problems is a bit wooly to say the least

Having worked in a test team for both CHT, BBESL and MJN couldsons it is not uncommon to test someone else's work and also i will stand by the fact that a test is only as good as the moment it is done!

I don't see how a company can issue an EIC for work that they haven't done. If checked at various stages throughout the job then fair enough, don't see that as all that likely though.

 

[The Ranger]

I don't see how a company can issue an EIC for work that they haven't done. If checked at various stages throughout the job then fair enough, don't see that as all that likely though.

what happens say a company has done 80% of a job then goes under new contractor comes in and your saying they should then rip it all out and start again? no you certify it with limitations!

 

[D80]

What's the difference because once you do a eicr you've took the responsibilty for that report I would have no problem carrying out testing on some ones work if it all complys with bs7671 then there's no problem

You can't put LIM on an EIC, you can on a EICR. Unless you are able to inspect under floorboards, in the walls etc then I'd not be signing no EIC. On an EICR it can be recorded that you couldn't inspect these.

 

[Marnik]

Well, how do you think the LABC get away with it then. I have seen this quit often now, scenario; the owner wants to do a spot of DIY wiring, notifies LABC, pays the fee(LABC says "TA VERY MUCH , we'll send someone to check your handywork during the various stages, and then certify it) Guess what? No-one actually checks during the work, but tests and certifies it after.(if they do at all).
Is that not the same as signing someone elses work? How can LABC justify this? Unless there is PROPER regulation,this part P business will never work. If someone asks me, i carry out a full EICR , That way i know that the whole installation is safe and complies.

 

[The Ranger]

You can't put LIM on an EIC, you can on a EICR. Unless you are able to inspect under floorboards, in the walls etc then I'd not be signing no EIC. On an EICR it can be recorded that you couldn't inspect these.

there is nothing to say you can't attach your own forms! (infact you don't even have to use the commonly used layout) and thats exactly what i'd do survey the work I can see record it record what I can't see and progress. the words reasonably practical spring to mind and thats all you can do be as reasonably practical as the situation you are in.

 

[D80]

what happens say a company has done 80% of a job then goes under new contractor comes in and your saying they should then rip it all out and start again? no you certify it with limitations!

I'd use the extent of work section to cover exactly what I did and not that all of the other parts of the installation have been tested only.

You'd probably be ok with that approach throughout with an EIC, but I don't see how you can put limitations on an EIC.

And if someone else's work proved not to be up to requirements that can be recorded on an EICR, not an EIC. The payment for that is a different issue altogether.

 

[Adam W]

If an EICR carried out by someone who didn't do the work is sufficient to certify a new installation, why do we even have an EIC?
I also don't see what is so special about an electrician appointed by LABC that means he/she can inspect and test someone else's work.

 

[krishcanag]

thanks, this is clear. I have a friend who is not registered with anybody (niceic ETC) but has over 30 years experience, but I just don't want liability as such to fall on my head!!

If you inspect and test a new installation and complete an electrical installation certificate for that installation, you are now committing yourself to responsibility for any defects, faults or subsequent problems that occur.
You would be liable with no recourse to anyone else for any legal action that followed.

If there is a new installation that needs checking then an EICR can be done on that installation; this would have defined extent and limitations on the form and thereby exempt you from liability for anything that you could not check. It would also not have your signature as responsible for the design, construction, inspection and testing.

 

[krishcanag]

I am sure every sparky would agree, the issue here is one is capable of knowing everything that was done unless you rip out the floorboards, break the walls etc etc depending on what was installed.

What's the difference because once you do a eicr you've took the responsibilty for that report I would have no problem carrying out testing on some ones work if it all complys with bs7671 then there's no problem

 

[krishcanag]

having read more responses I am just as confused now as at the start, people seem to have different views on this and I am non the clearer as to which document to use when if I am doing a certification for someone elser's work

 

[WayneL]

There's nothing wrong with third-party testing........I have full approval and backing from 'Napit' for doing just that.

If it's an EIC, you only sign the section for inspection/test.......you don't sign the design or construction bit.

You cannot, of course, notify work by doing this.........you are only inspecting/testing.

 

[Richard Burns]

thanks, this is clear. I have a friend who is not registered with anybody (niceic ETC) but has over 30 years experience, but I just don't want liability as such to fall on my head!!

If you have a friend with 30 years experience, then presumably he is competent, he does not need to be registered with anyone to complete an EIC.
He can complete the EIC himself or if he has designed and installed and you have inspected and tested then you sign the appropriate parts of the three part EIC.

The issue to which I was referring is when there is a installation fully completed and yet not inspected and tested (and for the purists, an installation where you are not employed as the inspector and tester for work colleagues) and you are asked to complete the inspection and test and sign off all the EIC.

For building control notification of Part P work you can only self certify (unless you are the QS for a company's registration).

 

[Des 56]

having read more responses I am just as confused now as at the start, people seem to have different views on this and I am non the clearer as to which document to use when if I am doing a certification for someone elser's work

Like thousands of other competent sparks,my mate has never bothered with part pants
It has never been an issue
He is at the moment doing a number of hmo's, the clerk of works, astonishingly, made mention of that unspoken building reg the silent P
He asked if he was registered,thats the first one I have heard of doing so in Wales
I will be doing the certificates for these jobs

I will use a 3 part certificate and my mate can sign the design and construction
If it has to be notified then I will do that as well

My patience has run out with this part p fiasco,testing others work and certifying and registering it if need be will be my new approach

Completely against the spirit of what part p was supposed to encompass,but in my mind they have long enough to make sense of the mess but have done nothing,so I will bend their system to suit me and my mate,you may well consider this approach as well

 

[GT1]

......

 

[GT1]

Like thousands of other competent sparks,my mate has never bothered with part pants
It has never been an issue
He is at the moment doing a number of hmo's, the clerk of works, astonishingly, made mention of that unspoken building reg the silent P
He asked if he was registered,thats the first one I have heard of doing so in Wales
I will be doing the certificates for these jobs

I will use a 3 part certificate and my mate can sign the design and construction
If it has to be notified then I will do that as well

My patience has run out with this part p fiasco,testing others work and certifying and registering it if need be will be my new approach

Completely against the spirit of what part p was supposed to encompass,but in my mind they have long enough to make sense of the mess but have done nothing,so I will bend their system to suit me and my mate,you may well consider this approach as well

But certification of electrical work, be it a minor works or an EIC has nothing to do with Part P of the building regs. ?
It's a requirement of BS7671 (17th).

The work may or may not be notifiable work, the paperwork however is the same regardless.

 

[GT1]

having read more responses I am just as confused now as at the start, people seem to have different views on this and I am non the clearer as to which document to use when if I am doing a certification for someone elser's work

You endorse the EIC on inspection/test section. NOT the design/construction section, because that isn't your work.
Do you have your 2391.?

 

[krishcanag]

I have'nt done the exam yet, hopefully my march or may 2012.

You endorse the EIC on inspection/test section. NOT the design/construction section, because that isn't your work.
Do you have your 2391.?

 

[krishcanag]

In this case, who would be responsible to notify Building control? My friend? But he is not registered so then who?

There's nothing wrong with third-party testing........I have full approval and backing from 'Napit' for doing just that.

If it's an EIC, you only sign the section for inspection/test.......you don't sign the design or construction bit.

You cannot, of course, notify work by doing this.........you are only inspecting/testing.

 

[Marnik]

But certification of electrical work, be it a minor works or an EIC has nothing to do with Part P of the building regs. ?
It's a requirement of BS7671 (17th).

The work may or may not be notifiable work, the paperwork however is the same regardless.

Since when?
Part P is a part of the building regulations, has got nothing to do with BS7671 17th edition, Where does it say in the BGB?