Query re Part P Inspection

So in real terms if there is a date of manufacturer on the consumer unit which is latter then 2004 then there must be a certificate for it. For the rest it is near impossible to prove when the circuit was new, the cable may have been renewed, but it could have been an existing circuit so unless some one stands up and says I did it in year xxxx and it was a new circuit, it in nearly impossible to prove. So in real terms as long as you have a completion or compliance certificate for the consumer unit, then there is nothing else that is needed. OK nice to know everything is OK with an EICR but other than rented accommodation in Scotland it is not really required.
Whatever we may think/do ourselves (or perhaps even discuss 'in private'), I don't think it's really appropriate to suggest, in a public forum, that anyone should consider failing to notifiable work on the basis that it would be "nearly impossible to prove" that/when the work had been done.

In any event, in terms of what you wrote, it would seem that the OP probably does not have a completion or compliance certificate ion relation to the consumer unit that was installed ~5 years ago....
Basically, 5 years ago we had the house fully rewired by a registered electrician. Unfortunately, after that work was carried out, a whole series of events unfolded (not related to the work/elecrtician) that resulted in the certificate never been issued.

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
In any event, in terms of what you wrote, it would seem that the OP probably does not have a completion or compliance certificate ion relation to the consumer unit that was installed ~5 years ago....
Basically, 5 years ago we had the house fully rewired by a registered electrician. Unfortunately, after that work was carried out, a whole series of events unfolded (not related to the work/elecrtician) that resulted in the certificate never been issued.

Kind Regards, John
That was why in this case I pointed out the problem getting caught, as clearly he is missing the completion or compliance certificate for the full re-wire, he could apply for retrospective permission and furnish the EICR to show the wiring is OK to the LABC. And if they accept it, then he could get the missing completion certificate. It will likely cost him £250 for a bit of paper, it will not make the house any safer by paying that money, and he has already had an EICR done so he knows the wiring is OK.

The problem is you can't unsay things, once he tells the council guy he should have a completion or compliance certificate for the work, and he does not have one, if the guy says that will cost you £500 he can't then say never mind I will do without the completion or compliance certificate. I made the mistake with my dads house, I thought the builder had applied for planning permission to convert a loo and pantry into a wet room, so when the builder ran off I informed the council that I would be taking over the job. Only then did I find out he had not bothered applying. We were also told in no uncertain terms it was the owners responsibility to apply for planning permission, the fact that most builders did it for the client did not mean it was the builders responsibility they were just helping the client. As it turned out we were not charged because the work was for my mothers disability. However it resulted in the builder ceasing to trade, so no chance of getting money back.

Some times it is better to let sleeping dogs lie.
 
... he has already had an EICR done so he knows the wiring is OK.
Up to a point - but, as I wrote to him, the problem with an EICR is that it cannot identify any 'accident waiting to happen horrors' that may be lurking within walls or below floors etc., if they are not yet impacting on what one can determine by testing.
Some times it is better to let sleeping dogs lie.
It is - and, as you will know, I am a great believer in 'pragmatism' in all sorts of situations (and I can now actually talking of pragmatism without the 'forum police officer'jumping down my throat :) ). However, that does not alter my views about what should, and should not, be said or written 'in public'.

Kind Regards, John
 
Maybe it is because I went down the road of getting a completion certificate that I am not worried about getting one. I did all the inspecting and testing, and I submitted the certificate to the LABC, without visiting the house, they in turn issued a completion certificate. All the certificate says is the LABC inspector trusted me. It does not in any way shape or form show the house is safe.

Pay for an EICR yes, employ people who can issue an installation certificate yes, but both the completion and compliance certificates just say some one trusts the electrician doing the work. Some one has decided the electrician has the skill and equipment to do a good job, that does not mean he has done a good job, just he has the ability to do a good job.

I would agree that an EICR can miss faults, but so can an installation certificate, if a plaster after the cables have been installed and tested puts a fixing through the cable, which causes the metal in the stud wall to become live, and if the plumber fails to fix the over flow tun dish correctly, and if the system over heats and water cascades onto the metal in the stud wall, then Emma Shaw may be electrocuted. We are lucky today the RCD would likely trip before anyone touches the water which it seems was live. And in that case the person doing the tests actually fudged up the test results when he could not get the reading expected, instead of telling his boss there was a problem. The court it seems took the attitude that the guy testing was thick and did not realise what he had done was wrong, and his boss took the can for asking him to do work, which he was not trained to do. Personally I feel asking a guy to plug in a machine and record the reading is a reasonable request, all he had to do was enter the reading he had got rather than make up some fictitious result made up by the lads in the tea cabin.

However the case shows how even an installation certificate does not show the property is safe, and all Part P did was to register that an installation certificate had been issued, and would not have stopped the death. What changed was BS7671 which in 2001 and even in 2004 with amendment 2 did not require the RCD protection required when BS7671:2008 came into force. That was nothing to do with Part P. All Part P did was to require electricians working on domestic properties to pass on some of their hard earned cash to either the local authority or to some scheme operator who in theroy should check a section of the work to ensure it complied, had the LABC selected just one socket and tested the RCD and loop impedance and checked the results matched the installation certificate then OK they will likely catch out the rouge trader. But they did not even visit to have a quick look around, they just posted the completion certificate. So tell me how does the issue of a completion certificate show the installation is OK?
 
Sponsored Links
I'm about to be in a similar position, having just found out my builder has quit the job because I won't pay him the last 8 grand until he's finished. This means I have to find myself a new electrician for the works covered by building control.

can I conclude from this thread that all the existing new work will need to be retested? and remaining work completed by the new electrical?
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Back
Top