EICR - C2 - circuits 1 and 2 low insulation resistance reading

[JohnW2]

The Electrician has just refused to share the test results with me. He has come back and said - "Am not arguing over some readings the house wiring is well dated and feel free to get a 2nd opinion too . Anything less than the 1 meg is a fail so if it says less than thats cos it is" - and - "Get someone else to go do the test and i will transfer you the money back after i have had a copy of the new report."

Unfortunately, I have little to add beyond what BS3036 has already written.

Just one thing, in case you feel inclined to give him "one more chance". As BS3036 has said, he did not write "less than 1 meg" on the EICR (but, rather, "<1000"). Is it conceivable that he thinks he wrote "<1" (or, maybe, "<1.000")? Had he written that, whilst we would still wonder why he hadn't given an actual figure, we wouldn't be disagreeing that the two circuits in question definitely 'need attention'. You could therefore, if you wished, tell him that you understand that <1 would be a 'fail', but do not understand why he has written "<1000".

Also, as I've said before, even if the readings were <1 M, that certainly wouldn't mean that a "full rewire" of the flat (which is what you seem to have been applying) would be needed, and wouldn't even necessarily mean that the two sockets circuits needed to be 're-wired', since it might be possible to find and rectify the cause of the low IR readings. Whilst it might be true that the flat would 'benefit from' a full re-wire, there's nothing on that EICR which suggests that anything beyond those two sockets circuits may 'need' re-wiring. Have you discussed with him the possibility of approaches less than a "full rewire of the flat"?

You clearly have had positive past experiences with this electrician and feel some loyalty, maybe even 'affection', towards him but, as BS3036 has said, his current attitude is such that, if it were me, I would probably want to sever my (working) relationship with him! The rather surprising (and 'refreshing') thing is that he has invited you to get a 'second opinion' and seems willing to refund your money (does he mean for all of the EICR?), which is not typical of what one might expect in this situation.

If you don't feel inclined (as above) "to give him one more chance", then I would suggest that you try to find another electrician who would be prepared to fully test just the two sockets circuits - and then take things from there.

From the point-of-view of your current electrician, the silly thing about this is that if (despite what he has written on EICR) he is correct in saying that the sockets circuits require attention, then by behaving as he is he is not only missing out on that work, but possibly also any other future work for you.

Kind Regards, John

 

[dpm_dpmartin]

Have you discussed with him the possibility of approaches less than a "full rewire of the flat"?

Absolutely, that was my first email the other day which went unanswered. I asked - "Thanks. I am not against a re-wire as it gives me options. However, no surprise that my Tenant is dead against it. All is quiet on the Western Front right now, but I have been asked "why can't it just be fixed?" What she means in her way is - can what you identified on the report be remediated so the C2s are gone, even the C3s maybe, and the EICR passes? Or is the remediation of the C2s impossible for some technical reason I do not fully appreciate?" - I then waited.

It was this morning that I followed that up with a WhatsApp. I asked - "Did you get my email about 13 XXXXXXXXXX Road? There's a couple of issues - first and foremost is the Tenant is not leaving imminently so the re-wire is off the cards for the immediate future - so when you have a second can you please let me know what you can do to remove the C2s from the EICR through necessary (not preferred) remediation?"

And that was when he responded with - "The c2 s are there for a reason ie rewiring required due to low insulation resistance readings , not my rules as we all have guidelines to work to pal" - and then you know the rest, all from this morning. I have asked, one more time, for the actual figures... saying I assume the <1,000MΩ is a recording mistake - but he's now gone silent.

At no point did I ever say I disagreed with his recommendation / advice about a re-wire (I still don't, actually, I'm open-minded)... but I did tell him that I had a significant challenge with the seemingly mutually exclusive demands of the Tenant (wanting to stay) and him (wanting an empty property to do a re-wire). It was only when I raised this thread here, wanting to find out a little more about potential remediation options for the noted C2s, that other things came to light... that is... the EICR not being entirely correct in the C2s being justified by dubious test results and some of the C3s not really expected to be there at all.

Even if I wanted to provide any Electrician with an empty property to do that re-wire... I just cannot achieve that position with the Tenant. Even an eviction notice (Section 21, which is completely unfair on her, isn't it?) has a timescale now of at least 6 months, due to Covid. So I really do need someone to tell me there can be remediation work undertaken while she is there - and I now know it's not this particular Electrician, he refuses to discuss it. I am supposed to get it satisfactory in short order (assuming it is not, of course!). I am happy to do so, but how? It all feels like a Kafka novel.

 

[JohnW2]

.... I have asked, one more time, for the actual figures... saying I assume the <1,000MΩ is a recording mistake - but he's now gone silent.

Well, that was the "one last chance" I suggested - so, if he remains silent, he presumably has sealed his own fate, even in your eyes?

.... So I really do need someone to tell me there can be remediation work undertaken while she is there - and I now know it's not this particular Electrician, he refuses to discuss it. I am supposed to get it satisfactory in short order (assuming it is not, of course!). I am happy to do so, but how? It all feels like a Kafka novel.

At the very very most, all that would be needed (to deal with the C2s) would be to 're-wire' the circuits with the alleged low IRs - and that presumably would be by no means impossible with the flat still occupied (let's face it, few people 'move out' even for a complete re-wire) - but, as I've said, it's by no means a foregone conclusion that those circuits would even need to be 're-wired', anyway.

As I've said, I think that your next step has got to be to get another electrician to test just the circuits with the allegedly low IRs - and then take things from there.

It can't be anything but a wild guess but, if I had to say what outcome I thought would be most likely, it would probably be that re-testing will show that there is no problem that needs attention - either because, although "less than 1,000 MΩ", the readings are actually plenty high enough to 'pass' and/or, as flameport has suggested, that the measurements were taken in a fashion that caused the results to be 'artificially'/'artefactually' lower than 'the truth'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[dpm_dpmartin]

I have posted something (the investigation and potential remediation job) on Checkatrade just now.

 

[JohnW2]

I have posted something on Checkatrade just now.

Fair enough but, as I presume you realise, such places can be a pretty iffy source of reliable tradespeople?

Kind Regards, John

 

[dpm_dpmartin]

Well, look at me now!!! The thing is, all a Landlord desires is someone they can trust to a) not rip them off and b) be there. I don't have a friendly Electrician - I do have a friendly Heating Engineer, Plumber, Gardener, Handyman and even a Roofer... but not an Electrician (hence my disappointment). If you (or anyone) know anyone Sheffield way... let me know, a recommendation is worth its weight in gold.

 

[JohnD]

I have posted something on Checkatrade just now.

If it was complimentary, it will probably be published.

If not, it will probably disappear.

Advertising websites are like that.

 

[JohnW2]

Well, look at me now!!! The thing is, all a Landlord desires is someone they can trust to a) not rip them off and b) be there. I don't have a friendly Electrician - I do have a friendly Heating Engineer, Plumber, Gardener, Handyman and even a Roofer... but not an Electrician (hence my disappointment).

In your initial post, you did say that you also had a "friendly Electrician", but I presume you are saying that you have now revised that judgement Of course, it's not only about 'friendly' - he might (still) be the most friendly and nicest person in the world, but not necessarily someone you would want to continue doing work for you.

If you (or anyone) know anyone Sheffield way... let me know, a recommendation is worth its weight in gold.

It's unfortunately 'next-to-impossible' - for landlords and owner-occupiers alike. Whilst, in theory, a recommendation is, indeed, 'worth its weight and gold', the vast majority of the general public (including landlords) can only 'recommend' on the basis of superficial considerations - pleasantness, tidiness, availability, punctuality, prices and the 'visible appearance of work done' - leaving the crucial question about how competently (or even safely) work has been done as essentially 'unknowns'.

Of course, if someone here is able to help you themselves, they will presumably let you know.

Good luck.

Kind Regards, John

 

[dpm_dpmartin]

Yes, I have revised my assessment after the flat refusal to provide basic data, or any admission that something was just done by mistake, and the level of almost-aggression back as soon as I asked. Anyone should be able to ask questions about a report they've paid for without the author going off the deep end. Anyone should be able to ask about other potential solutions apart from the single expensive path forward recommended. And, finally, anyone should be able to take into account the wider picture of someone's home being affected by that activity.

What has struck me more than anything... is that there must have been a flurry of EICRs done in the last year (with the changes)... and surely some required re-wires... but I have not yet found another Landlord in my own network who admits to having a re-wire done and having to turf out their Tenant at the same time.

 

[JohnW2]

Yes, I have revised my assessment after the flat refusal to provide basic data, or any admission that something was just done by mistake, and the level of almost-aggression back as soon as I asked. Anyone should be able to ask questions about a report they've paid for without the author going off the deep end. Anyone should be able to ask about other potential solutions apart from the single expensive path forward recommended. And, finally, anyone should be able to take into account the wider picture of someone's home being affected by that activity.

All totally agreed. No matter how friendly/nice he may have been (and may still be), it sounds as if he really is no longer 'acceptable' to you as an electrician.

What has struck me more than anything... is that there must have been a flurry of EICRs done in the last year (with the changes)... and surely some required re-wires... but I have not yet found another Landlord in my own network who admits to having a re-wire done and having to turf out their Tenant at the same time.

Indeed. Since the new legislation appeared, we've certainly seen here a good few examples of landlords apparently being 'ripped off' by seemingly 'work-generating' EICRs.

As for your second point, I'm not in the business of re-wiring anything, so can't comment from that perspective, but over the years/decades I've know plenty of friends/family/colleagues who have had houses/flats completely rewired, and very few (if any) have had to 'move out' whilst that was being done. So I think that, quite apart from anything else, your guy is being unreasonable/unrealistic in expecting that.

Kind Regards, John

 

[blup]

You stand to lose a tenant if he/she kicks up a fuss about moving, even temporarily - you may even need to get a court order. That is a lot of hassle (and lost rent if you have to re-let) compared to parting company with your current sparkie, or even just getting a second opinion.

Blup

 

[securespark]

I do feel he's got his Ohms and MegOhms muxed ip.

But what worries me is that he thinks the only way to fix a low IR is to rewire. Similarly, he thinks old cable should be replaced.

And he cannot ID aluminium cable.

 

[JohnW2]

I do feel he's got his Ohms and MegOhms mxed ip.

I presume you probably mean KilOhms and MegOhms - such that his "<1000" means <1000 kΩ (aka <1 MΩ)? If so, that means that for the circuits he has 'passed' his ">1000" means >1000 kΩ (aka >1 MΩ), whereas I would think that virtually any electrician would record the actual figures.

... unless, I suppose, he has some sort of Mickey Mouse IR meter which simply indicates (perhaps with an LED!) 'above or below 1000 kΩ' (or 'above or below 1000 MΩ') ! Maybe it's a 'PATester'

... but that would mean that all three circuits (2 sockets circuits and cooker circuit) he has 'failed' ("<1000") (but none of the other circuits) really did have IRs less than 1M - and I wonder how likely that is (if he measured correctly)?

But what worries me is that he thinks the only way to fix a low IR is to rewire. Similarly, he thinks old cable should be replaced.

Indeed - and, thirdly, that he thinks that even if/when a re-wire is required, it can only be done on an unoccupied flat!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

I'm tiring of this ...

see comment

 

[securespark]

Oh, the embarrassment, not to say irony!

Complaining that someone has their Ohms mixed up and I do the same.....