Tricky Issue With Certification

[rins]

Thanks everyone

i do seem to have a habit of finding the dodgy landlords of the world haha well no more i had my fair share more private advertising from now on cheers again

 

[steptoe]

ah, now we are back to the do a bit of testing before quoting CU change scenario,

had you done that then you wouldnt have been is this situation,

still, not all lost, get paid, issue cert with obviously those circuits not on it,

arse covered,

 

[kerching]

God put cameras on mobiles to be used. If I get a situation where I have to leave a job 'part finished' I take a few pics of the work with a copy of that days newspaper within shot. In my worthless opinion if

then I am covered in some small way

Also I would only put a date of about 3 months on the cert so after this time it was worthless...you could even put '1 week' on it....that would go down well :slap

 

[Nicky Tesla]

the "cheaper" spark would not need to do a certificate if all he did was repair / fault find on an existing circuit.

 

[steptoe]

the "cheaper" spark would not need to do a certificate if all he did was repair / fault find on an existing circuit.

but if he connected it it would need a cert,

or is it already connected ? [awaiting repair?]

 

[Nicky Tesla]

The client could have said that the DB has been there for a year already and the circuit was dissconected after the faults occurred

 

[steptoe]

The client could have said that the DB has been there for a year already and the circuit was dissconected after the faults occurred

he wants a cert for the new CU though

 

[Nicky Tesla]

No......He just wants a cheap job. He will insist he doesn't need one for the repair, just one for the DB

 

[steptoe]

exactly, and it needs to cover every circuit in the DB,

this is where the issue of what was actually connect to the CU comes up,

if the OP connected it then he is responsible.

 

[Nicky Tesla]

agreed but there will be no, other cert

 

[ProDave]

Personally I would note the details of the failed circuits on the certificate so anyone reading it would know what was wrong.

Then in the comments section say "left disconnected until faults were corrected"

That will cover your arse and show you found the faults and left them disconnected. It will also not be the "complete" certificate he really wants, but that's his problem.

 

[oldsparky]

tell him he will get the certificate when he pays you, end of, then put it down in limitations

 

[philbas]

This confuses me, If you take you car to the garage an say " I wan;t an MOT" they will give it one, then they give you a certificate that says "In our opinion the car is a death trap, the brake pipes are corroded, the brake pads are shot and the tires are worn out" But you still get a cert to say failed the requirements and you still have to pay.

But when it comes to the electrics they say is I want a certificate, and what they mean is they want one that says all is fine, even if it isn't.

If they pay they should get the certificate, it just may not say what they want to hear.

 

[Nicky Tesla]

if you took your car to the garage and paid to have your front brakes pads changed, but then the mechanic said that your discs were nearly worn out, would you expect him to replace them aswell for the same price as just the pads.

 

[philbas]

No, the point I'm trying to make is they are paying for a certificate,it does no have to say what they want it to say.

 

[Nicky Tesla]

it foes no have to say what they want it to say

WHAT??????

 

[philbas]

How more simple can I put it. you pay to have it inspected, not rectified, if it fails you still have to pay for the inspection

 

[Nicky Tesla]

he was doing an install not a PIR