Up to you but you can’t force anybody to spend money.
Life and our regs aren’t like that
Anyway far too many DIYers completely ignore the regs - what are you going to do about that?
rental with no rcd.
- Thread starter Jurassicspark
- Start date
Up to you but you can’t force anybody to spend money.
Life and our regs aren’t like that
Anyway far too many DIYers completely ignore the regs - what are you going to do about that?
Sponsored Links
Yeah that.
Very true - but that's not what we';re talking about.
The issue is whether the OP should 'bring to the attention' ('advise') the property owner their concerns about the installation (despite another electrician having said that it was OK') - after which it would then be up to the owner to decide whether he/she wanted to 'spend money' as a result of this 'second opinion'.
As I've said, my view is that someone in this position really has a moral/professional obligation to bring their opinion to the attention of the owner of the property - or, if you want to view it more cynically, to do so as a 'CYA' measure.
Some people might take a view that you (a pro) had seen some of their installation so must have seen part of it and not voiced concerns so they assumed it was ok as it was not mentioned.
I have know a few folk exclaim "XYZ saw it bet never mentioned it so it must have been OK otherwise they would have said"
I have know a few folk exclaim "XYZ saw it bet never mentioned it so it must have been OK otherwise they would have said"
Sponsored Links
It’s a matter of judgement in the end
There are too many so called sparks scaring the pants off customers when there aren’t real issues.
Then there are the increasing numbers doing dodgy work for cash and no certs
I have and do warn people in writing about issues I think they should address - whether they act on my advice is up to them. I do not try and strong arm people into doing work
All agreed
As I implied, that's what I feel should be done. In the OP's case, I presume that you would probably regard the apparent absence of any main bonding (and maybe the absence of any RCDs) as things you should at least 'mention' to the owner?
Indeed - as I said, once they have been informed about potential issues, it's then entirely up to them.
Indeed - but one problem is that, unless it is 'obvious', it is not necessarily clear as to what some will have seen (or be reasonably expected to have seen.
One sees this quite a bit in medicine, since some people seem to think ('unreasonably') that if they see a doctor about some specific issue, the absence of any other comments from the doctor means that they can be reassured that everything else about their body is 'OK'. If, for example, someone consulting a doctor about, say, a painful knee has a 'suspiciously cancerous' skin lesion on their face, or if they clearly are having difficulty in breathing )both being ';very obvious' things), then one would certainly expect/hope the doctor to say/do something about that 'incidental' observation.
On the other hand, if it happened that, as well as their knee problem, they had, say, (asymptomatic) heart disease or diabetes, it is not really reasonable to expect a doctor examining a knee to have become aware of that.
...and it's not difficult to think of analogous situations in relation to an electrical installation
Kind Regards, John
Absolutely.
But if I were to see something concerning obvious to me as warranting attention the I would not not mention it and if they someone else passed it as ok i would still mention it.
Of course my idea of being obvious to me would not always be obvious to a joiner, plumber, brain surgeon or high tech whizz kid
But if I were to see something concerning obvious to me as warranting attention the I would not not mention it and if they someone else passed it as ok i would still mention it.
Of course my idea of being obvious to me would not always be obvious to a joiner, plumber, brain surgeon or high tech whizz kid
Sure, I think we're agreed about that - but the difficulty (from the point-of-view of the owner of the installation) is that they will not necessarily know what would, and would not, be 'obvious' to you. As you say ...
quite - but, perhaps more to the point, maybe even a different electrician.
Kind Regards, John
This should have been a start.
But we need a government that thinks tenants should have rights
And doesn't cut council budgets so much that they don't have the staff to do their jobs.
Time for a change, perhaps.
But we need a government that thinks tenants should have rights
And doesn't cut council budgets so much that they don't have the staff to do their jobs.
Time for a change, perhaps.
Although many/most of us are unhappy about the way is has been done, and implemented, the introduction by the government of legislation relating to electrical installations in rented properties presumably indicates that, conceptually, they had the interests of tenants in mind - the legislation certainly doesn't benefit either landlords or the government itself.
Maybe, but not without qualification - 'change' can be 'changer for the better' or 'change for the worse'.
The problem we seem to have at present (and which might persist until the election) is that the group of people who might offer an alternative to our present government are fairly good at pointing out what they regard as 'wrong' with actions of our government but seem unable and/or unprepared to tell us that they would do which might be better - so it's hard for us to judge whether they would be offering 'a change for the better' or a 'change for the worse'.
Kind Regards, John
I'm sure you can guess which party was against it when it first came up.
www.independent.co.uk
"Communities minister Marcus Jones said the Government believed homes should be fit for human habitation but did not want to pass the new law that would explicitly require it."
And
"The proposed amendment reflects the contents of a private members bill blocked by Conservative MPs in October last year.
That bill, proposed by Labour MP Karen Buck, was “talked out” by backbenchers, including Conservative MP Philip Davies, who is himself a landlord."
It may be relevant that the Government changed its mind after the huge public outcry resulting from the Grenfell catastrophe.
No doubt manifestos will be published prior to the next election.
Tories vote down law requiring landlords make their homes fit for human habitation
72 of the MPs who voted against the measure are registered as landlords themselves
www.independent.co.uk
"Communities minister Marcus Jones said the Government believed homes should be fit for human habitation but did not want to pass the new law that would explicitly require it."
And
"The proposed amendment reflects the contents of a private members bill blocked by Conservative MPs in October last year.
That bill, proposed by Labour MP Karen Buck, was “talked out” by backbenchers, including Conservative MP Philip Davies, who is himself a landlord."
It may be relevant that the Government changed its mind after the huge public outcry resulting from the Grenfell catastrophe.
No doubt manifestos will be published prior to the next election.
That's a rather different "it" and there is no doubt that the legislation I was referring to was introduced by the present government.
They certainly will be, but no party has a particularly good record of honouring manifesto promises/commitments if/when they get into power - so even that will not mean all that much.
Kind Regards, John
I hate getting into political discussions but on this occasion; for that party I think you have made my statement for me and it has always been the case.
I don't want to get involved in political discussion (here) either. However, I don't think I agree that my statement necessarily can be generalised to 'always' in relation to the party in question. Let's face it, their previous leader brought about a catastrophic election performance for his party at least partially because he did make it pretty clear what he would do if elected to government!
In any event, the general truth is that it is far easier to be in opposition than in power, since it is far easier to find fault with and criticise the actions of others (particularly with the benefit of hindsight) than it is to get actions 'right' oneself in real time (no hindsight).
After all, we accept the concept that 'critics' may 'criticise' the works of the most admired artists, composers, chefs or whatever, even though we know that none of them could 'do better' than those they are 'criticising' - so why different for politicians or political parties?
... in other words, I suspect we might well be saying much the same if the tables were turned, and the parties currently in government and opposition were reversed - the opposition party would be identifying the faults of government, but not telling us much about 'how they could/would do things better', even if they thought they knew!
Kind Regards, John
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
Sponsored Links
