Yet Another Dodgy EICR

[JK-Electrical]

A prospective customer has contacted me via a recommendation received from a mutual contact and asked me to provide a quotation for remedial works that have arisen from an EICR that was recently undertaken at a three-bedroom property he rents out. In his initial e-mail, he said that the letting agent has told him that the following remedial works are necessary:

Replace Fusebox then test and certify
Materials to replace a double socket
Materials to install main gas bond, 10m of 16mm earth cable, 2 bonding clamps

I asked the property owner to forward me a copy of the EICR. I have redacted all personal details contained therein and have uploaded the report for your consideration, scrutiny and appraisal. My own personal assessment is that the property owner has been ripped-off by a drive-by tester and that the report isn't worth the paper that it's written on. Although the property owner was charged just £95.00 by the letting agent, even this amount could be considered excessive given the poor quality of the report.

Over to you guys .....

 

[ferg]

Lol that must be a mistake.

Perhaps the spark didn't read it before sending it and missed the error.

 

[MJPD29]

Points 9 and 10 are strange to say the least. If the kitchen sockets are not a ring/radial what are they? Or am i missing something

 

[JK-Electrical]

Points 9 and 10 are strange to say the least. If the kitchen sockets are not a ring/radial what are they? Or am i missing something

According to the test schedule, there is no circuit for the kitchen sockets. Indeed, according to the test schedule there are no circuits anywhere in the installation ..... all of which are stated to have a Zs of 0.17 ohms!

 

[Dustydazzler]

Page after page after page of cross....

Not worth the paper it’s written upon

 

[Snailspark]

If this was a lesson on how not to do an EICR then it’s been a real education!!

 

[NDG Elecs]

That's how I'm gonna start filling in the test results from now on! What a time saver it will be!
I didn't find the list of observations too offensive TBH. Could have been worded better but have seen worse. But without the test results surely it's just a visual ?!

 

[JK-Electrical]

But without the test results surely it's just a visual ?!

Although the tester has stated that the installation was "100% tested", the absence of any test results casts a long shadow of doubt as to whether he actually did carry-out a full range of tests on every circuit. This report isn't fit for the purpose as without the test results it's utterly useless as it tells us nothing about the overall condition of the installation.

 

[JK-Electrical]

My observations:

1. The form used is the 2008 version. The tester should have used the current 2018 version.

2. The installation is said to have been "100% tested". If so, then why has the schedule of tests been left blank?

3. The summary of the condition of the installation has been left blank. Why?

4. Mandatory inspection and testing of private rented accommodation in Scotland takes place every five years, not three as is stated on the report.

5. The nominal voltage of the installation is stated to be 239 volts. I would normally attribute an error like this to a typo, but given the other glaring errors that I've noticed on this report I'm not sure that this actually is a typo.

6. The maximum demand check-box has been marked N/A. Sloppy.

7. Main protective bonding to gas and water services is stated to be present. If so, then why has the property owner been quoted for "materials to install main gas bond"? Furthermore, why has the tester quoted for a 16mm conductor when 10mm would suffice?

8. Section 3.1, all parts relating to main protective bonding have been marked as satisfactory. But how can this possibly be so when the property owner has been told that part of the remedial works concerns the installation of bonding to the gas service? Which of these two contradictory statements is true and which is false?

9. Although the earthing system has been marked as being TN-C-S in section 5.12, RCD(s) provided for fault protection has nevertheless been checked. Some mistake surely!

10. Section 5.16, presence of RCD restest notice, has been marked as N/A. Another glaring error.

11. Giving C3 codes for the items listed in sections 5.20 and 5.21 is bordering on the ridiculous. It would be quicker just to affix the missing labels. Ditto section 6.1. Giving a code for unsleeved switched lives is unwarranted IMHO.

12. Section 6.9, presence and adequacy of circuit protective conductors has been marked as satisfactory. However, under the Schedule of Items Tested, it is stated that continuity of protective conductors requires further investigation. Why the contradiction?

13. The Test Results and Circuit Details section contain no data other than multiple entries in the Zs column of 0.17. Since the report was supposedly checked before being signed-off by the tester's boss, there really are no excuses for the extremely poor quality of this EICR. None whatsoever.

Then there are the codes. In my opinion, items 1, 2 and 3 do not merit codes. I'm puzzled as to why a faulty socket merits a C2 while a faulty FCU merits a C3.

The description given for item 7 would make more sense if the tester had stated which circuit he believed to be overloaded.

Item 8 isn't something I would code unless something drastic had occurred such as wetpants installing a boiler directly in front of the consumer unit.

Had the tester bothered to list the actual readings obtained from his IR tests we might then know the identity of which "2 x separate circuits" he's referring to regarding item 9.

As for item 10, all I can say here is WTF? If the kitchen sockets aren't on a ring then they must be on a radial and vice-versa. I would expect to hear such a ridiculous statement from a plumber or a kitchen-fitter, but never from someone claiming to be an electrician.

I'm utterly embarrassed to reveal that the company responsible for this report are SELECT members. My advice to the property owner will be that he should either refuse to pay for this EICR, or obtain a refund as the report isn't worth the paper that it's printed on. I would also advise that the installation be retested by a reputable contractor so that its true condition may be ascertained. I would further advise the property owner to make a complaint to SELECT whom I'm sure will be aghast.

 

[NDG Elecs]

Although the tester has stated that the installation was "100% tested", the absence of any test results casts a long shadow of doubt as to whether he actually did carry-out a full range of tests on every circuit. This report isn't fit for the purpose as without the test results it's utterly useless as it tells us nothing about the overall condition of the installation.

I was being tongue in cheek there JK. I agree that it is not worth the paper it is written on at all, and this should not be paid for at all The schedule of test results is the main page we go to I would say for 'useful' information about an installation. Doesn't the 'tester' say something about low IR in the observations as well...! Low IR where !

And do sparks in Scotland use a different main switch? I use 60947-3 type usually !!

 

[JK-Electrical]

Well-spotted NDG. The tester has inputted 60497-3 on site instead of 60947-3 and the error wasn't picked-up by his boss when he supposedly checked the form.

From what I've learned about the company concerned, it is apparent that they are a one-stop "landlord compliance" service who offer not only electrical certification, but gas certification too. On their website they say that they:

provide certification services to landlords and letting agencies including PAT testing, EICR, gas safety, legionnaires assessment, smoke alarm testing and fitting.

And:

We will liaise directly with your tenants, carry out the work to the highest standards and all certification will be completed electronically and available same day to access and download any new or archived certificates at any point from your client login area.

However, the extremely poor quality of this EICR makes a complete mockery of the claim that they "carry out the work to the highest standards".

They continue:

We prove all certificates required to be fully compliant. Fast efficient service with documents available online within hours of the inspection. We can fully manage all your portfolio of properties or a simple buy as required service.

I'm quite certain that this was a 'let's get this report done as quickly as possible so we can get to our next job as we've got another five EICRs to do today so we can meet our target and avoid the boss' wrath type of job. The property, incidentally, is a three-bedroom flat. My fee for that would be £165.00. This is about as much as the over-saturated market will pay up here. A big factor in why prices for EICRs are so low in Glasgow is largely down to the dubious practices of companies such as the one who did this report. But you get what you pay for in the end.

 

[andyb]

My observations:

1. The form used is the 2008 version. The tester should have used the current 2018 version.

2. The installation is said to have been "100% tested". If so, then why has the schedule of tests been left blank?

3. The summary of the condition of the installation has been left blank. Why?

4. Mandatory inspection and testing of private rented accommodation in Scotland takes place every five years, not three as is stated on the report.

5. The nominal voltage of the installation is stated to be 239 volts. I would normally attribute an error like this to a typo, but given the other glaring errors that I've noticed on this report I'm not sure that this actually is a typo.

6. The maximum demand check-box has been marked N/A. Sloppy.

7. Main protective bonding to gas and water services is stated to be present. If so, then why has the property owner been quoted for "materials to install main gas bond"? Furthermore, why has the tester quoted for a 16mm conductor when 10mm would suffice?

8. Section 3.1, all parts relating to main protective bonding have been marked as satisfactory. But how can this possibly be so when the property owner has been told that part of the remedial works concerns the installation of bonding to the gas service? Which of these two contradictory statements is true and which is false?

9. Although the earthing system has been marked as being TN-C-S in section 5.12, RCD(s) provided for fault protection has nevertheless been checked. Some mistake surely!

10. Section 5.16, presence of RCD restest notice, has been marked as N/A. Another glaring error.

11. Giving C3 codes for the items listed in sections 5.20 and 5.21 is bordering on the ridiculous. It would be quicker just to affix the missing labels. Ditto section 6.1. Giving a code for unsleeved switched lives is unwarranted IMHO.

12. Section 6.9, presence and adequacy of circuit protective conductors has been marked as satisfactory. However, under the Schedule of Items Tested, it is stated that continuity of protective conductors requires further investigation. Why the contradiction?

13. The Test Results and Circuit Details section contain no data other than multiple entries in the Zs column of 0.17. Since the report was supposedly checked before being signed-off by the tester's boss, there really are no excuses for the extremely poor quality of this EICR. None whatsoever.

Then there are the codes. In my opinion, items 1, 2 and 3 do not merit codes. I'm puzzled as to why a faulty socket merits a C2 while a faulty FCU merits a C3.

The description given for item 7 would make more sense if the tester had stated which circuit he believed to be overloaded.

Item 8 isn't something I would code unless something drastic had occurred such as wetpants installing a boiler directly in front of the consumer unit.

Had the tester bothered to list the actual readings obtained from his IR tests we might then know the identity of which "2 x separate circuits" he's referring to regarding item 9.

As for item 10, all I can say here is WTF? If the kitchen sockets aren't on a ring then they must be on a radial and vice-versa. I would expect to hear such a ridiculous statement from a plumber or a kitchen-fitter, but never from someone claiming to be an electrician.

I'm utterly embarrassed to reveal that the company responsible for this report are SELECT members. My advice to the property owner will be that he should either refuse to pay for this EICR, or obtain a refund as the report isn't worth the paper that it's printed on. I would also advise that the installation be retested by a reputable contractor so that its true condition may be ascertained. I would further advise the property owner to make a complaint to SELECT whom I'm sure will be aghast.

I suspect that your summing up of the report took longer to do than the report itself.

 

[Dustydazzler]

I have just done an EICR , I waved my note book at the consumer unit , poked my head round a few doors did i mention I left my tester in the van but no matter I know what the readings will be anyway.
I am going to scribble some notes on my test sheets , tick a few boxes at random as you do and head down the pub for lunch.
£195 cash in my pocket for 45mins work.

Am I doing this right ???

 

[Snailspark]

Is there any other way???

 

[Dustydazzler]

Is there any other way???

I could probably do it without even getting out the van like some many others do but my telepathic powers aren't what they used to be.
I would probably only charge £185 for a drive by as £195 would just be silly ?

 

[ChipFanDave]

Why not get the customer to "whatsap" you a couple of pictures of the consumer unit a random socket and light and if you want to do a decent job a picture of the gas meter as well.

You could then do all the paper work from home !

 

[static zap]

..... I use 60947-3 type usually !!

.... inputted 60497-3 ...(for)...60947-3

@NDG Elecs Give that man a "Cheesecake" ...

Ooops I'm getting my Spoons mixed up with
Spoonerisms!
(No Awards -"Reaction")
Well Done NDG Elecs.

 

[andyb]

I have just done an EICR , I waved my note book at the consumer unit , poked my head round a few doors did i mention I left my tester in the van but no matter I know what the readings will be anyway.
I am going to scribble some notes on my test sheets , tick a few boxes at random as you do and head down the pub for lunch.
£195 cash in my pocket for 45mins work.

Am I doing this right ???

Don't worry Dusty, you'll soon get faster with some experiance.

 

[Toneyz]

I have just done an EICR , I waved my note book at the consumer unit , poked my head round a few doors did i mention I left my tester in the van but no matter I know what the readings will be anyway.
I am going to scribble some notes on my test sheets , tick a few boxes at random as you do and head down the pub for lunch.
£195 cash in my pocket for 45mins work.

Am I doing this right ???

No you should be doing it from your van.

 

[Risteard]

4. Mandatory inspection and testing of private rented accommodation in Scotland takes place every five years, not three as is stated on the report.

Much of what you point out is valid, however I will have to disagree on this point. Regardless of whether the legal requirement is for these to be carried out five-yearly or not, the Report must surely state a recommendation to next inspection based upon the condition of the electrical installation. Otherwise the box would be pointless.

So if the condition of the installation warranted the advice of three years to the next inspection, then that is the interval that should be stated. Or if it was in really bad condition then perhaps six months or whatever. I have had this issue before with business owners complaining that I had not given a five year recommendation for their business premises. I pointed out that my assessment was based on the installation as inspected - as it is required to be.

 

[JK-Electrical]

Much of what you point out is valid, however I will have to disagree on this point. Regardless of whether the legal requirement is for these to be carried out five-yearly or not, the Report must surely state a recommendation to next inspection based upon the condition of the electrical installation. Otherwise the box would be pointless.

So if the condition of the installation warranted the advice of three years to the next inspection, then that is the interval that should be stated. Or if it was in really bad condition then perhaps six months or whatever. I have had this issue before with business owners complaining that I had not given a five year recommendation for their business premises. I pointed out that my assessment was based on the installation as inspected - as it is required to be.

I understand and would not normally take issue with what you say. However, in this particular instance I seriously doubt that an installation which the tester has assessed as being only 15 years old would require periodic testing at three-year intervals. Fifty years, perhaps, yes. Fifteen, no. Not unless the installation was in unusually poor condition for its age. But in the absence of any test results we have no way of determining if this is actually the case here.

 

[JK-Electrical]

Out of curiosity, what would you guys usually charge for undertaking an EICR in a three-bedroom property?

 

[Dustydazzler]

[in all seriousness you should probably charge around £250

Which allows you a full day to do the things properly and a full lunch hour to nip to McDonald’s

 

[Andy78]

Out of curiosity, what would you guys usually charge for undertaking an EICR in a three-bedroom property?

According to a landlord customer of mine £65. Can I beat that price she has been quoted ?

 

[Dustydazzler]

According to a landlord customer of mine £65. Can I beat that price she has been quoted ?

Yes of course madam , and I will drive past tonight and compile my report this evening. I won’t even have to disturb the tenants.
It will be with you via email at 9am tomorrow morning

Please deposit £64 into this bank account

 

[Dustydazzler]

I remember when I was an apprentice you could get a pir done at £4 per circuit

That was 2o years ago thou

 

[Dave OCD]

I've just quoted a private landlord £250, it's a 3 bed house. I always explain that I have to be thorough as it's important and need a day to do it right including the paperwork. Accepted immediately. But in that price we'd replace the odd damaged socket or light switch for example and if we complete the job in say 6 hours I'll knock a little bit off the quoted cost, they like that.

 

[DPG]

I've just quoted a private landlord £250, it's a 3 bed house. I always explain that I have to be thorough as it's important and need a day to do it right including the paperwork. Accepted immediately. But in that price we'd replace the odd damaged socket or light switch for example and if we complete the job in say 6 hours I'll knock a little bit off the quoted cost, they like that.

And the screw heads would be lined up

 

[JK-Electrical]

According to a landlord customer of mine £65. Can I beat that price she has been quoted ?

I've just quoted a private landlord £250, it's a 3 bed house. I always explain that I have to be thorough as it's important and need a day to do it right including the paperwork. Accepted immediately. But in that price we'd replace the odd damaged socket or light switch for example and if we complete the job in say 6 hours I'll knock a little bit off the quoted cost, they like that.

£250.00 sounds about right Dave. Alas, it just isn't possible to get anywhere near that kind of price accepted around Glasgow, not when you have "landlord compliance certification" companies offering to do EICRs in three-bedroom properties for £95.00.

I'm considering withdrawing EICRs from the list of services that I offer and withdrawing from this saturated market altogether as it's become a race to the bottom.

 

[Dave OCD]

And the screw heads would be lined up

Of course, vertical ! Even on an accessory with the white caps over the screws.

 

[Dave OCD]

£250.00 sounds about right Dave. Alas, it just isn't possible to get anywhere near that kind of price accepted around Glasgow, not when you have "landlord compliance certification" companies offering to do EICRs in three-bedroom properties for £95.00.

I'm considering withdrawing EICRs from the list of services that I offer and withdrawing from this saturated market altogether as it's become a race to the bottom.

To be honest I don't get quite a few mate, the accepted ones are generally existing customers or someone that I've been recommended to. But I'd say there's a major problem right across the country with bad EICRs, I see plenty just as bad as the one you've recently highlighted. It's never right when you're undercut by these unscrupulous idiots who couldn't care less, not sure what we can really do about it though....

 

[JK-Electrical]

To be honest I don't get quite a few mate, the accepted ones are generally existing customers or someone that I've been recommended to. But I'd say there's a major problem right across the country with bad EICRs, I see plenty just as bad as the one you've recently highlighted. It's never right when you're undercut by these unscrupulous idiots who couldn't care less, not sure what we can really do about it though....

Some of the EICRs that I've been asked to provide a second opinion on have either turned-out to be fake, or incorrect due to the tester's incompetence. If what I've witnessed up here in Glasgow is typical of the rest of the UK, then yes, we most certainly do have a major problem on our hands.

As honest, professional electricians all we can do is identify and expose unscrupulous operators wherever we find them.

 

[Risteard]

Out of curiosity, what would you guys usually charge for undertaking an EICR in a three-bedroom property?

£200 is my starting price for them, i.e. I don't do them for less than that.

So with a standard three bed generally the £200.

I personally feel the base price should be £250 to allow for a day but I've found that I can regularly get them accepted at £200 but £250 not so much so. That said, add a bedroom or power in a garage or shed or whatever and it would be £250 upwards.

 

[Risteard]

Of course, vertical ! Even on an accessory with the white caps over the screws.

I'll be honest. I line them up even when there are caps over the screws.

 

[Simon47]

I'd say there's a major problem right across the country with bad EICRs

Which makes a complete mockery of the mandatory EICRs for rented properties in Scotland and coming to England at some point. It just becomes a box ticking exercise to be done at the lowest cost possible.

 

[Des 56]

My estimation of 90% of eicrs falling well below what should be regarded as acceptable,it may not be far off the mark

Rouge companies who have destroyed the market with insane pricing whilst employing people with too little experience for the task

 

[Grant1987]

Which makes a complete mockery of the mandatory EICRs for rented properties in Scotland and coming to England at some point. It just becomes a box ticking exercise to be done at the lowest cost possible.

You’re absolutely right Simon although you didn’t mention WALES! The EICR now just seems to be pages of tick boxes the worst part is that I do EICR’s for private landlords and then don’t get called back to rectify problems I don’t know if it’s because I find so many problems and give accurate price to reflect their neglect of electrics over the years or if they want me to summarise the faults and then get a cheap sparky/diyer in to do botch jobs and get certificate from elsewhere won’t believe some of the stuff I’ve come across

 

[JK-Electrical]

Which makes a complete mockery of the mandatory EICRs for rented properties in Scotland and coming to England at some point. It just becomes a box ticking exercise to be done at the lowest cost possible.

My sentiments exactly.

My estimation of 90% of eicrs falling well below what should be regarded as acceptable,it may not be far off the mark

On the basis of what I've seen with my own eyes, I wouldn't disagree with your estimation.

Rouge companies who have destroyed the market with insane pricing whilst employing people with too little experience for the task

You have succinctly hit the nail on the head. Well said Des.

 

[richy3333]

@JK-Electrical Have you reported this to SELECT? I'm NICEIC but have to say my recent contact with them over poor work I found was exceptional even though the culprit wasn't registered with any CPS (or SJIB) and I'm not in the SELECT gang. In contrast the NICEIC were appalling.

 

[JK-Electrical]

@JK-Electrical Have you reported this to SELECT?

I most certainly have Richy. SELECT have been informed, and the company responsible for this poor-quality EICR will hopefully be disciplined, or better still, have their membership revoked. I sure hope so.

I'm NICEIC but have to say my recent contact with them over poor work I found was exceptional even though the culprit wasn't registered with any CPS (or SJIB) and I'm not in the SELECT gang. In contrast the NICEIC were appalling.

We will never be able to raise industry standards if we bury our heads in the sand, shrug our shoulders and say it isn't our problem. It is our problem! It's our industry!! Not only are these rogue companies compromising electrical safety in other people's properties, they are also compromising the livelihoods of conscientious contractors who can provide a more professional service, but who are prevented from doing so because they cannot compete with the ridiculously low prices that these rogue "landlord certification" companies submit.

I don't know what state the domestic market is in up in your neck of the woods, but down here in Glasgow the market is in very bad shape indeed. While I have come to expect poor quality workmanship from the plumbers, kitchen-fitters, bathroom-fitters and DIYers who carry-out electrical installation work, I do not, however, expect to see the same from a SELECT member. They bring discredit upon the good name of SELECT. I therefore had no reservations whatsoever in reporting the company concerned.