Quite - and, as I said, they can't do that in the context of an 'after the event' EICR. That was my point.I suspect that they may want to look at (eg) first fix and they can probably tell themselves if something "looks right".
Kind Regards, John
Quite - and, as I said, they can't do that in the context of an 'after the event' EICR. That was my point.I suspect that they may want to look at (eg) first fix and they can probably tell themselves if something "looks right".
Yes, I understand that, and agree that it's probably what they do. However, I was responding to ....Sorry, my wording wasn't very clear. I was meaning that BC might want to "inspect" at (eg) first fix - in the context of everything else they do, that's probably not a very onerous task (looking for safe zones etc).
I think I must have misunderstood you, since I thought you meant that getting an EICR done (by a third party) was all that a LABC would (or could) do in the name of "inspection and testing".... and IIRC the consensus was to do an EICR as that was the only "official" paperwork route open to them. Given a satisfactory EICR, the BC dept could then issue a completion certificate.
I assume very few (if any) actually have in-house capability. Mine quote two prices for minor electrical works - one if you provide them with acceptable test results, a higher one (about the cost of getting an EICR done) if you can't.
I recall back when the 2005 BRs came in, there being some discussions in the professional community as to how to handle such tests. The electrician could not "certify" the installation as only the BC dept has that power, and IIRC the consensus was to do an EICR as that was the only "official" paperwork route open to them. Given a satisfactory EICR, the BC dept could then issue a completion certificate.
As for Scoursespark's comment about responsibility, I guess BC have to stand behind their completion certificate. However, if it turned out that there was something seriously wrong with the installation it would come down to a "discussion" as to whether it was something the sparky could/should have reasonably seen during the inspection - and if so, then I guess potentially he could end up getting the benefit of all those PI premiums. Hard to see where a problem could end up in the sparky's hands unless a) something serious happened, and b) it could be shown that he really really should have seem something that was wrong.
Indeed, my bad wording.I think I must have misunderstood you, since I thought you meant that getting an EICR done (by a third party) was all that a LABC would (or could) do in the name of "inspection and testing".
Dunno about others, but our (South Lakeland) BC offer you the choice. For minor electrical works there are two prices, last time I looked about £150 and £225 (ish) - the difference being if they have to get someone in to check it or if you can provide them with documentation. With mine I didn't get to the stage of determining if they'd accept my documentation - haven't started the work yet, and as we've now sold the house (STC), probably won't.I was only pointing out that after notification BC shoild arrange for an electrician to I&T the job and not the customer (or is that incorrect?)
Yes, that is clearly the usual process. Approved Doc P does indicate that a Building Control Body (LA or otherwise) will decide how much I&T is required and (although this probably does not apply to many, if any, DIYers) may decide that the 'installer' (although not a self-certifying electrician) is competent to undertake the I&T and will therefore accept his/her EIC without requiring any other I&T (and that the fee may then be reduced).I was only pointing out that after notification BC shoild arrange for an electrician to I&T the job and not the customer (or is that incorrect?)
Eh? As my words (as above) which you tried to quote said, I specifically did not 'quiz' you, because I know you can be a bit sensitive about such things. You are, of course, 'jumping in' on a response I made to someone else, not to you.Do you QUIZ everybody or save that for me ....JohnW2 said:I did not bother to quiz him, but I was not quite sure what he meant by 'responsibility'.
With respect, that's a bit rich. Do I have to remind you that you have a history (at least in the past) of appearing here once every few weeks, usually on a Monday, and contributing only to the extent of seeking out something I'd written (to someone other than you) in the previous few weeks that you could 'take me to task' about.... as I can't post in here without you jumping in with your comments.
Hmmm - as above, how does that wish fit in with the fact that you did not leave me in piece when I answer another forum member?!!Maybe once in a while you can leave me to answer another forum member.
There was really no need for you to "reply" to Simon's response to my post - it was, after all, not 'addressed' to you. It was Simon who "brought you into" his post (which was a 'reply' to me), so it seemed perfectly natural for me to respond to what he had written when I replied to that post.Simon queried my use of the word "responsibility" and you decided to bring me into your reply, before i had a chance to reply.
As I implied, I think you are reading far too much into what I wrote. Is your problem perhaps with the word 'quizzing' - i.e. would you have been less affected had I written something more verbose, like "I did not bother asking for clarification because it was not really a particularly important issue" (which is essentially what I meant) ??Simon brought me into his reply and you then posted you didn't bother quizzing me, which i took as a bit strong.
I'm sure that's true of most, but there is obviously a wide spectrum of DIYers. Experience is obviously very valuable, but particularly in relation to skills, rather than 'knowledge'.I really can't see how a DIY guy would be able even with all the courses to do a part rewire, it needs so much experience which simply can't be gained from books.