Question about structural integrity after doing an EIC

[S60TEM]

We were asked to go and do an EIC for a 3 bed house after a very reputable company had rewired it but their electrician couldn't test it for some reasonheadbang

Now, although there was a few little bits of snagging needed doing, the install tested out fine "electrically".

BUT.....

The electrician had fitted downlights into the kitchen ceiling and as we were removing them to check for the terminations/ chocboxes etc etc this is when we noticed !!

He had drilled into the ceiling on a row of lights that had hit the floor joist bang in the centre! Instead of moving the light he has drilled up into the floor joist with a core cutter and removed the whole depth of the downlight from the joist in two places for the two downlights!!!

Now, to me that makes the floor structurally unsafe on that one joist and it needs to be rectified before the cert can be issued? Am I right in thinking that as it fails the test from both a part p perspective but also a part A for structure?

Any thoughts??

 

[Lurch]

Fail.

Just to expand on that slightly, the lights may well be fine to mount in combustible surfaces, but the weakening of the structure is a definite fail which would in turn cause the whole job to fail so no certificates of any kind should be issued by anyone for anything, except for maybe the windows, they're probably still fine.

 

[Andy™]

sums it up nicely Lurch

since you cant notify, and i doubt the other spark will be, thn LABC will be involved. im sure they would like to see it...

 

[steptoe]

FAIL

and,

you CANNOT issue an EIC for someone elses work either,

it is entirely ILLEGAL,

if you issue an EIC for anothers work you have broke the law.

 

[Andy™]

if you issue an EIC for anothers work you have broke the law.

you can legally sign the I&T part though

 

[batty]

How the hell do the idiots work like this, did he not poke a screwdriver in the ceiling before drilling the hole. He should be made to pay or his company to put this right.

 

[steptoe]

[quote name='Andy

 

[Doc Hudson]

It sounds very hazardous to me, not only the structural strength, but the heat from the fitting, how have they ensured sufficient clearance around fitting. it sounds to me as though you need to report the reputable company and get them back to organise remedial works.

Doc H.

 

[Andy™]

how,if I understand this correctly the 3 part certs are designed for firms where different people carry out different parts of the design/install/I&T,

NOT for different firms to fill in their own little bit.

you can NOT legally as I understand it certify someone elses work,

how can you inspect cables hidden in walls(safe zones) etc,

and with the exception of CU change of like, there should be no limit on extent of covered on a new EIC.

sometimes its an external company who does the I&T. there are companies who specialise in this.

 

[Evans Electric]

Poke in a screwdriver, find the joist , then 16-18" centres for the others . To core drill one light into a joist is madness ......to do it twice beggers belief.

 

[S60TEM]

guys, I wish I had taken a picture! I couldn't believe it!!

The whole install is visable as its awaiting final finishing and plastering so we inspected everything. We work sometimes through an agent who contracts us to do tests PIRs etc etc. We are well within the law dont worry, I was just pondering your opinions.

cheers

 

[steptoe]

[quote name='Andy

 

[PC Electrics]

This is downright dangerous and nothing short of cowboy work standard. The client should seek reparation asap.

I would also advise the client to complain to the electricians scheme and Trading Standards.

edit:

as Doc says, structurally unsound and a serious fire risk.

 

[PC Electrics]

how do they get insurance?although, saying that it is possible.

maybe they are there during 1st fix to inspect?

missed previous post,

then you can do I&T,

so obviously no plasterboard etc up, otherwise you couldnt inspect cables in void, so why not just move the lights over.?

but it's not just the lights that need moving. those beams need strengthening to repair them and restore their strength.

 

[Sidewinder]

Now this is what Part P should REALLY be about, ensuring that ALL the work done meets ALL RELEVANT Building Regs!...

 

[green-hornet]

I have not been on for a while, but for my first reply I thought I would throw a spanner in the works.

If any of you think Part P is anything to do with building regulations and enforcement of them, you live in cloud cookkoo land, if Part P meant anything we would all be too busy to visit a forum with complaints about others work, and would only post on real problems like how to rewire without disturbance, or can I get away with a radial circuit for the kitchen if I apply diversity, or if I use a 16mm cable for an individual peice of equipment can I spur off from it to supply a socket.

From experiance you can just do what you like, Part P will never be enforced, and its a waste of time being registered, cynical I know, but its the truth. This year I am going AC I have never wanted to but Part P makes me want to, at least with AC I can hold my head up and say I may be carp but I know what I am doing, where as with part P we all know its all the scam providers who take the cash and leave a void.

 

[SPECIAL LOCATION]

This is downright dangerous and nothing short of cowboy work standard. The client should seek reparation asap. I would also advise the client to complain to the electricians scheme and Trading Standards.

edit:

as Doc says, structurally unsound and a serious fire risk.

Concur with PC

Formal complaint ASAP ! :O

:SaluteGuinness

 

[Apache]

Good to see you anyway GH

 

[Manator]

Good to see you GH, but why so cynical?

At least your alive

 

[batty]

Yes its good to see you Greeny but cheer up it will soon be christmas and we get a few days off.