Really Jarred Off With This Customer!

[Dunx]

Did an a Eicr some time back and found the following issues.

1) couldn't find binding to CW , did find a random length of 10mm next to earth clamp but gave a tug and not connected. C2

2) combi boiler in kitchen was mounted next to outside wall leaving aprrox 150 mm gap between boiler and wall. Dangling down this gap were cables for spur and main JB. All t/e type cabling. There was single insulation showing and trapped behind metal cover plate. No access to either accessory for maintenance. C2

3) Unenclosed bathroom light, outside of zones but easily touchable from floor. C2

I also did a c1 repair whilst I was there, broken lamp holder showing bare terminals.

Advisory, one battery smoke alarm in the incorrect position.

I charged 105 for the test and rework and landlord refused to pay. Went on for months and they finally agreed to pay, came back from holiday expecting a cheque on the mat....zilch! Emailed customer and they said 'we have had the property retested by a reputable (puke) company and they have passed it!' So I went back thinking that this reputable ( puke again) company had done the rework, but no nothing done.

Their EICR was blank of comments, I have been back and taken photos and recently found out that the gas fitter has also commented on gas safety record about electrician required to sort wiring next to boiler.

Comments?

 

[Blue Duck]

That'll teach you for C1'ing a lampholder.

Just walk away...

 

[steptoe]

Jaysus, where are you that you can do EICRs for £100,!?!?!? 

 

[Doc Hudson]

I can't comment about the actual installation nor specifically your EICR or the other EICR as I have seen neither. But general comments are, battery smoke detectors bare no relevance to a periodic inspection as they are not connected to the fixed wiring that you have been asked to inspect. A bathroom light that is outside of zones is no different from any other light in the property and it is perfectly permissible within BS7671 to be able to touch a lamp holder whilst standing of the floor, consider wall lamps, table lamps, numerous ceiling pendant fittings in all sorts of rooms. Therefore to give a code stating it is potentially dangerous requiring urgent action (C2) would on the face of it appear a little bit over zealous. Unless you had prior agreement to do remedial works then you should have just isolated any danger and left it to the client to decide if they want you to repair the lamp holder. A periodic inspection is just that, an inspection. Now if you have a signed contract requesting a PIR and undertake remedial work then pursue him for your money. Other than that on the information given it is possible for the customer to suggest you have been working outside of the remit of what he/she requested you to do.

Doc H.

 

[ProDave]

You are obviously wanting to chase him for payment now.

What I have always found to work (so far) is send a letter by recorded delivery with a copy of the bill, saying if payment is not received within 14 days, you will hand it to a debt collection agency who will pursue the debt through the courts.

 

[Steve3948]

Did an a Eicr some time back and found the following issues.

1) couldn't find binding to CW , did find a random length of 10mm next to earth clamp but gave a tug and not connected. C2

2) combi boiler in kitchen was mounted next to outside wall leaving aprrox 150 mm gap between boiler and wall. Dangling down this gap were cables for spur and main JB. All t/e type cabling. There was single insulation showing and trapped behind metal cover plate. No access to either accessory for maintenance. C2

3) Unenclosed bathroom light, outside of zones but easily touchable from floor. C2

I also did a c1 repair whilst I was there, broken lamp holder showing bare terminals.

Advisory, one battery smoke alarm in the incorrect position.

I charged 105 for the test and rework and landlord refused to pay. Went on for months and they finally agreed to pay, came back from holiday expecting a cheque on the mat....zilch! Emailed customer and they said 'we have had the property retested by a reputable (puke) company and they have passed it!' So I went back thinking that this reputable ( puke again) company had done the rework, but no nothing done.

Their EICR was blank of comments, I have been back and taken photos and recently found out that the gas fitter has also commented on gas safety record about electrician required to sort wiring next to boiler.

Comments?

So with the C1 and C2 you have failed the installation, and this is not what the landlord wanted, they never do.

I would agree with the water main being C2 but only if testing proved it was potentially dangerous, if an acceptable reading was obtained I would have C3.

The others did not warrant C2, as the boiler is of no concern to you, so you could have put overall condition as Satisfactory, the certificate states providing that the observations are rectified.

He would have been happy and paid you and then you could have given him an estimate for the remedial observation repairs.

However if the test on the water main was not satisfactory then it was a fail regardless.

105 is cheap, we start at 180

 

[Sharpend]

Lesson to learn. Landlords only ever want a Satisfactory report. There is a whole industry of firms that give a satisfactory report for a few bob, if you are doing it as a professional EICR then as Steve said your rates should start much higher, but don't expect to do many landlords at this price.

 

[SLIPSHOD & SLAPDASH]

I also learnt my lesson years ago, the customer signs first that the fee is for carrying out an inspection, not for the result of it & they do not get the report until payment has been made.

99% of the time they ask probing questions about the result before payment so i just stretch the truth and say  'a few silly bits & pieces, nothing to worry about' when its a big Unsatisfactory really.  Agents are worse than landlords as they think an unsatisfactory  means they are not managing the property correctly.