Registered Electrical Contractors Failing to Comply With Regulations

2011

I have started this thread following an excellent post (below) from Irish Steve on another thread that was drifting way off topic.

Irish Steve wrote: »

Similar experience here with my own house, was checking in the roof some time after we moved in, and found a 3 way strip loosely wrapped in tape, the earth wires were not even connected, just wound together, so that had to be sorted, and it meant I then went looking VERY closely at every other piece of wire in the house. This was pre Celtic Tiger, we moved in to the house in 1990.

Pretty sure that most of the cowboys that worked here went on to train the bigger cowboys that were responsible for the Celtic tiger mess.

I found more than a few things here that needed sorting, like unsleeved earth wires all over the place, light services with no earth at all, loose screws on sockets and switches, incorrect colour coding on cables, it took me a while to sort it all out, like a couple of days to get the heating working, I had to strip out the control centre and start again, 1.5 double insulated solid in a control box that's fused 3 amp and designed for .5 panel wiring flex made for problems, as it didn't fit the terminals if more than one wire was needed. Once that was done, I then had to sort out all the zone valves and time switches, and the boiler and pumps, despite having given the (not very bright) spark that was doing the job all the information he needed to do it, including complete wiring diagrams, he clearly couldn't understand them.

That's why I now don't trust Registered electricians any further than I can throw them, I've spent a lot of time sorting out things that should never have been passed, but there was no inspection.

There were 20 houses in that phase of the estate, Ours was the only one that ended up with a reliable and working heating system, and I would guess that some of the other houses have had some interesting issues with electrics too, if my experience was anything to go by.

And yes, the OP is probably going to have to use a REC, as far as I'm concerned, that's the law. Totally inappropriate, but the trade bodies have been able to get away with it.

Crazy, in that you have to have a REC to do most domestic work, but an unregistered spark can carry out work in a location such as a commercial kitchen, or a hotel, and in some cases an explosive environment, and there's no requirement for registration.

That tells me that there has been some very strong lobbying by vested interests, and they have succeeded in bringing in totally inappropriate levels of restriction, probably because the publicity surrounding the "consultation" was buried so deep the vast majority of sensible thinking people knew nothing about it until it was too late to do anything about it.

Aviation is one of the most regulated industries, for good reasons. On the maintenance side, a significant number of engineers will work under the supervision of a licensed engineer, and the licensed engineer will sign for, AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR, all the work carried out, and if anything goes wrong, he is the one that is in the direct line of fire. If the concept of certifying the work of others, having carried out necessary inspections, is appropriate for the aviation industry, why have we got more restrictive systems on electricity, gas and things like alarms and CCTV.

Perhaps we (the consumers) should be pushing for freedom of information reports on how many inspections are carried out by RECI and ECSSA, how many of those inspections fail work carried out, and how many complaints are made by customers over a year, just to make sure that the regulators are actually doing the job they are being paid very well for. A slight red herring, but indicative maybe, I was looking at the RECI and ECSSA web sites earlier, and it's worrying how out of date they are, and how many links to areas that are supposed to provide information are broken. details of training courses that finished 6 months ago doesn't give me the impression of an organisation that's doing the job professionally and competently

If it's appropriate for reports to be issued about people like nurses and doctors that are brought before their regulators, maybe RECI and ECSSA should be made to publicly report on how they deal with their bad apples. We all know where the banking regulators ended up letting things go, I have the same concerns about the regulators in some of these other industries, they are conspicuous by their silence, and low profile, probably because they don't want to lose members either from expulsion, or from resignations because they are seen to be over regulating.

2011

Irish Steve wrote: »

Similar experience here with my own house, was checking in the roof some time after we moved in, and found a 3 way strip loosely wrapped in tape, the earth wires were not even connected, just wound together

Not acceptable.
Same experience in my own home, it was built 7 years ago at the end of the Celtic Tiger.

Pretty sure that most of the cowboys that worked here went on to train the bigger cowboys that were responsible for the Celtic tiger mess.

I served my time in the early 1990s under the watchful eye of "old school" electricians (kind of like "Father Jack" types ) on large industrial projects.
Like all apprentices at the time we were ruled with an iron fist (literally).
Standards were very high and they had to be maintained.
Failing to carry out work to the required standard would mean that you would not be taken to the next project.
An apprentice could be out of a job for a seemingly minor offence.

I noticed a change in the attitude of many (not all) apprentices during the Celtic Tiger years and in the lead up to them. These apprentices became electricians and the attitude deteriorated further.

This applied in particular to many (but not all) that worked in the domestic sector. There was a blatant disregard for the regulations and almost a distain for customers.

Due to the fact that some electrical contractors were willing to ignore fundamental regulations this gave them a competitive advantage over the more conscientious contractors. This meant that electrical contractors that complied with the regulations lost work as they were far more expensive and their profit margins were reduced. Many quit and moved into another area (myself included).

Once that was done, I then had to sort out all the zone valves and time switches, and the boiler and pumps, despite having given the (not very bright) spark that was doing the job all the information he needed to do it, including complete wiring diagrams, he clearly couldn't understand them.

Very similar to my own experience.

That's why I now don't trust Registered electricians any further than I can throw them, I've spent a lot of time sorting out things that should never have been passed, but there was no inspection.

I feel your pain, but they are not all like this.

There were 20 houses in that phase of the estate, Ours was the only one that ended up with a reliable and working heating system, and I would guess that some of the other houses have had some interesting issues with electrics too, if my experience was anything to go by.

Same for me.
I sorted some of the neighbours heating systems.

Totally inappropriate, but the trade bodies have been able to get away with it.

My experiences with a RECI inspectors has very disappointing to say the least. Breaches of regulations have been so blatant that in each case they acknowledged the fact. However the electrical contractor was only made fix the issues that were simple to resolve. One inspector told me that it was acceptable to "protect" a 1.5 flex (feeding my cooker) with a 32A MCB :eek::eek:

Crazy, in that you have to have a REC to do most domestic work, but an unregistered spark can carry out work in a location such as a commercial kitchen, or a hotel, and in some cases an explosive environment, and there's no requirement for registration.

It is crazy, but this is going to change. Domestic was tackled first as most of the offenders were working in this area. I was talking to a member of the ETCI committee and he told me this.

Perhaps we (the consumers) should be pushing for freedom of information reports on how many inspections are carried out by RECI and ECSSA, how many of those inspections fail work carried out, and how many complaints are made by customers over a year, just to make sure that the regulators are actually doing the job they are being paid very well for.

Things have changed in the recent past. Now you can go over the heads of the governing bodies by reporting them to CER.

tomdempsey200

there was certainly very little oversight in my 15yrs(reci)

the 'performance marking scheme' was coming in as I was leaving and the CER
....not sure how much things have tightened up day to day though

I presume you can still get away with breaches of wiring rules easily?

the situation with commercial is crazy..for instance I know of incompetent diyers who have been employed to carry out work in schools and they haven't a clue what they're doing

Irish Steve

Thanks for splitting it out, and interesting that your experiences were similar in some areas.

I think that what caught me completely by surprise was that in 1990, I was effectively new to the "Irish" system, having worked in the UK for the previous 20 years in the Computer industry, and during that time, we also bought a very old pair of cottages, and totally gutted and renovated them, which meant everything new, water, electric, gas, plumbing and heating, and it all had to be inspected by the service supplier before they would connect, and exactly as you've mentioned, in those days, the inspections were very rigorous. Things like external drains were inspected by the local authority before they could be covered, and if they were either not up to spec, or were covered before they came, they had the power, (and used it when needed) to force the builder, or whoever, to rip it all out and do it again.

The legislation here at the time on the surface appeared to the similar, but what's become very apparent over time is that the inspection and supervision is not there in this country, even now, which of course is what's led to things like Priory Hall and the like, and the sickener is that the people that were supposedly responsible and "signed off" on these projects are not being hauled through the courts and made to pay (either via their insurance schemes, or from the professional bodies that register and (supposedly) supervise them.

My background was not the normal apprentice type route, I was an engineer on large computer systems, so you got trained specifically for the systems and areas you were working on, over time, and it was down to the engineer to commission, including connect, the system on site, so a lot of electrical work on very sensitive equipment, which also perversely used significant power, and of course, the work on the house meant I had to get up to speed on the appropriate domestic regulations in order to be able to get it approved and connected, which happened without any hassles, in that as I was going to be living in the house after it was completed, I had a significant motive to make VERY sure that everything was safe!

15 years later, I then encounter the "Irish" system, which on the surface was very much the same as the UK, but even back then it was going off the rails, and went completely off the rails in the subsequent years, and some of that is down to the profit motive, and the absence of effective regulation, and (the real problem) the proliferation of "training" organisations that are only worried about pushing people through the sausage machine with the end result being a paper qualification.

I am still involved with computers, in a different area, and I see it all the time in this industry, there are hundreds of "training" organisations, and the result of that is someone of my age, who learnt their trade when if you failed you were out, has next to nothing in the way of paper to "prove" their skill set, other than long experience, and stands no chance when most of the pre interview scanning is done by HR types that only understand the new concepts of a pile of (often worthless) paper.

Don't misinterpret this, If you know how to read a manual, or the technical regulations, installing electrical wiring to meet the specs is not as such hard. Most major manufacturers provide either a guide or examples of how to install their products, so if you have any experience in similar areas, it's not hard to get up to speed.

I know that work I've done in the past has been "acceptable", and has passed any inspection thrown at it, as well as the acid test of time, but I am now in the crazy situation where I'd like to be registered, so that I can provide a service to friends and family, but becoming "registered" for someone of my age (> 60 with no formal paper to "prove" skills and experience) is impossible, and at this stage, would be horrendously expensive, and the same is true for a very closely related industry, Security and CCTV, and there, it's even more crazy, alarm systems are usually run from a 12 V supply, and the basic scenario is they are all a very low power, low technology reduced capability computer with specialised sensing devices attached. To have the degree of regulation and cost involved to be a member of that exclusive club is crazy, and no one has yet managed to persuade me of the validity of having such draconian regulation on what should be a sub set of the electrical industry.

So, I find myself in danger of being criminalised by a system that's been changed in ways that are insane, because that industry doesn't want to accept responsibility for checking and monitoring the quality of the work being carried out by the members of that industry. My house and garage is very much non standard, for a starter, I have 3 phase power, with a 30Kva autostart diesel standby generator, and a 16 Kva UPS that has 300 V DC battery bank capable of storing 200 amp hours of power, and I will guarantee that if I bring in a spark to do repairs on certain areas of that overall system, it's going to take him a day just to get up to speed on what's here. I put it in, from the ESB fuses onward, so if it breaks, I will fix it. So far, because I put it in carefully, it hasn't broken in any areas that would be an issue. but things like the 2 sets of 100 Amp interlocking contactors are now nearly 20 years old, so there's no certainty that they will continue to perform.

I also know I have lost potential jobs, or customers, because I have point blank refused to do certain things the way the customer wanted them done, either because they were dangerous, or illegal, or sometimes, just plain stupid! The classic has to be a local Italian restaurant not too far away (it's changed hands now, so I can talk about this safely) that asked me to have a look at their dishwasher. It wasn't working correctly, partly because the water in the area is so hard, it had scaled up all manner of things, but also because one of the 2 heaters had failed. The Chef knew it had failed, but in order to "keep it going", he'd wrapped the broken heater element ends that work under the water with cooking foil "to keep the water out", and carried on using it! Because of the capacity, it wasn't wired via an ELCB, and the break was mid element, so didn't go above the current rating of the breaker. Suffice to say he won't be doing that again any time soon, when I found what he'd done, he was told in very short syllable words ( He's not Irish, so they had to be short) exactly what the implications of his stupidity were!

Another example, a registered spark (name fortunately for him unknown) was called to a Chinese restaurant (now also changed hands) to solve a problem with a fire alarm system that kept cutting the power and gas to the kitchen. The problem was that there was a very high power gas Wok range close to a heat detector, and it was well capable of setting off an alert, which due to an unfixed fault provided the second alert to the fire alarm panel, which would then immediately trigger the alarm, which would kill the electric power AND the gas supply to the kitchen. He couldn't fix it, so to "reduce" the inconvenience to the kitchen, 3 clothes pegs were fitted to the shaft of the emergency gas cut off valve to prevent it closing when the alarm went off, so that the kitchen staff could just reset the circuit breaker in the kitchen to get the lights back on, and carry on "as normal". I walked away from that one, having removed the cloths pegs, if I'd known who the spark was, it would have been reported, but it was all anonymous. I am pretty sure that "fix" was at the direct insistence of the Chinese owner.

Maybe the answer is to have a much better and easier to access system for reporting things like this, at all levels, the present system seems to be way too complicated and obscure, probably to make it easier for the regulators to say that "sure, there are no problems, we don't get many reports".

If this makes a few people's hair curl, sorry, but that is the state of some of what's going on out there, and the regulators are doing very little to weed out the rotten apples, as that will cost them membership.

At my age, I'm not looking to start taking serious construction type work away from registered contractors, but I am wanting to be able to continue to support my own systems, and provide support (which is more often than not paid for in kind) to members of my immediate family and friends who call me because they know I may be able to help. To be forced by legislation to get a stranger, who I may not be able to rely on, at any hour of the day or night because of the nature of faults, to do a job that I have been safely and competently doing for close on 40 years is bluntly, deeply offensive to me, because I am being both potentially criminalised and demeaned by a system that has lost all sense and reason.

2011

tomdempsey200 wrote: »

I know of incompetent diyers who have been employed to carry out work in schools and they haven't a clue what they're doing

That is very different.
A completely different standard should be expected from Registered Electrical contractors. After all they are meant to be the professionals.

tomdempsey200

part of the problem at the beginning was the emergence of the ecssa shortly after reci was formed
you had 2 organizations competing for members
it certainly didn't help matters

tomdempsey200

unless they've started random unannounced spotchecks and inspections....the bad work will continue

and of course the issue of enforcement of all remedial work.. not just the minor stuff

and discipline of rogue contractors

they would be the issues of concern in the self-certification system ime

Irish Steve

2011 wrote: »

That is very different.
A completely different standard should be expected from Registered Electrical contractors. After all they are meant to be the professionals.

Absolutely, especially where the safety of children is concerned, but unfortunately, if an (amateur part time) board of management of a school is faced with a large bill that won't get paid by central government, and is presented with what looks to be a viable alternative at possible one third of the cost, which one are they likely to choose? That's what is so crazy about the way things are being done right now, and I'm afraid I don't fully understand the logic of it.


Maybe the problem with commercial work is that "other" trades are involved, I do (computer) work for a company that supplies electric fork lifts, and they have to provide chargers for those fork lift, which are often 3 phase and need significant power. The engineers that service the trucks are well used to dealing with electricity, a fork lift battery at up to 96 Volts can easily provide a current of in excess of 600 amps, which can do serious damage in the wrong circumstances, and they have to fix chargers on a regular basis!

So, if that engineer goes to a company to set up a new forklift, and discovers that there are "issues" with the power, do they then have to get in a spark to change a panel circuit breaker, or just do the job because the customer will be unable to work, and they are well able to do it, there's no fault as such, the most common scenario is that the breaker needs to have a different tolerance because of the device (charger) that's connected to the circuit.

A customer under pressure to get loads in and out is not going to wait possibly several days for a spark to call to swap out a circuit breaker, and with the way things are, a "small job" like that is probably not going to get a high priority, and it could well also be that it will have to be done out of hours, as to be safe, the main switch on that panel will have to be opened for a short while to swap the breaker out. Getting a spark to work out of hours for a 10 minute job like that may not be easy.

It used to be very simple, tradespeople had a pride in their work, and there was no need to have massive layers of bureaucracy to make sure that they knew the correct procedure for a discreet f*rt!

A classic in that respect, one of the sites those fork lift engineers go to on a regular basis now has a requirement that ANY contractor coming on site has to have a Safe Pass card? How did that get approved? The answer is that some jobsworth in Human Resources that has probably never seen an ear defender was persuaded by a Union Health & Safety representative that the HR person could be liable in the event of an accident occurring.

What happened to the concept of personal responsibility?
Perhaps the problem is that our education system focuses so much on paper qualifications (paper again!), we've lost track of teaching people how to DO practical things. Some of the comments and questions I see here in these forums on more than a few occasions make me think that is very much the case.

Then of course, there's the compensation culture. :mad:
There's been some very revealing revelations on the box over the last few days about a very large number of emergency service workers in New York post 9/11 who have claimed massive sums in compensation, but who have now been seen and proved to be claiming fraudulently.

Could never happen here of course :P

Where's that cave?

brightspark

Irish Steve wrote: »

So, if that engineer goes to a company to set up a new forklift, and discovers that there are "issues" with the power, do they then have to get in a spark to change a panel circuit breaker, or just do the job because the customer will be unable to work, and they are well able to do it, there's no fault as such, the most common scenario is that the breaker needs to have a different tolerance because of the device (charger) that's connected to the circuit.

A customer under pressure to get loads in and out is not going to wait possibly several days for a spark to call to swap out a circuit breaker, and with the way things are, a "small job" like that is probably not going to get a high priority, and it could well also be that it will have to be done out of hours, as to be safe, the main switch on that panel will have to be opened for a short while to swap the breaker out. Getting a spark to work out of hours for a 10 minute job like that may not be easy.

Can you clarify what you mean by a different tolerance that makes you think it is such a small job (to be done correctly)



If you mean increasing the amperage?

Then you need to know if the cable and it's installation method is able to carry the increased capacity, not something a forklift engineer has the relevant training and experience to decide.
He would also need to know the board is able to take the increased load.


If you mean changing the tripping characteristic? (putting in a C type, or even D type!)

Then you need to know the earth loop impedance for the circuit, otherwise the breaker may never trip! Without the correct instrumentation how is the forklift engineer going to know.

It's not a 10 minute job!

2011

Irish Steve wrote: »

A classic in that respect, one of the sites those fork lift engineers go to on a regular basis now has a requirement that ANY contractor coming on site has to have a Safe Pass card? How did that get approved?

My understanding is that insurance companies pushed for this.
If you have an accident on site it is your fault because you received safety training, so you should have known better. I have sat through 3 or 4 of these courses. They focused on areas such as excavations and the installation of scaffolding that were of no relevance to me.

tomdempsey200 wrote: »

they would be the issues of concern in the self-certification system ime

In my opinion the solution is very simple: No more self-certification.
It simply does not work.

I think that the regualtions (ET101) themselves are good.
We just need to have them enforced across the board.

tomdempsey200

brightspark wrote: »

Can you clarify what you mean by a different tolerance that makes you think it is such a small job (to be done correctly)



If you mean increasing the amperage?

Then you need to know if the cable and it's installation method is able to carry the increased capacity, not something a forklift engineer has the relevant training and experience to decide.
He would also need to know the board is able to take the increased load.


If you mean changing the tripping characteristic? (putting in a C type, or even D type!)

Then you need to know the earth loop impedance for the circuit, otherwise the breaker may never trip! Without the correct instrumentation how is the forklift engineer going to know.

It's not a 10 minute job!

that's why it's a simple job to them!
because they don't have to check Zl
apparently!

brightspark

2011 wrote: »

My understanding is that insurance companies pushed for this.

The insurance companies are the real force behind most safety rules,

PAT testing has been in the safety regs for some time now, but a lot of companies haven't bothered with it yet...but will when their insurance companies demand it.

2011

Irish Steve wrote: »

So, if that engineer goes to a company to set up a new forklift, and discovers that there are "issues" with the power, do they then have to get in a spark to change a panel circuit breaker

Yes, they should get an electrician to change out the MCB.
This circuit should then be tested and certified by a suitably qualified person.

If this work were to result in the panel going on fire and causing an outage which resulted in the factory closing for a number of days or if someone were to get injured (or worse) an insurance company (or the HSA) may start looking for test documentation and credentials.
The fire may not even be related to the recent modification, but it will still likely to be viewed as the cause due to the timing.

In the absence of such documentation the insurance company may be reluctant to pay out. The HSA are unlikely to care that the customer was "under pressure". They would see that as irrelevant.

I am sure that you would be more than capable of doing this work. I agree that the system we have in place does not work and that many electrical certificates are worthless pieces of paper. However, the solution is not to have a regime in place where anyone that deems themselves competent can just “have a go”. Particularly when it comes to at swapping out MCBs on 3 phase distribution boards in an industrial/commercial installation.

As I am sure you know swapping out an MCB can have a knock on effect with undesirable consequences.

Irish Steve

2011 wrote: »

My understanding is that insurance companies pushed for this.
If you have an accident on site it is your fault because you received safety training, so you should have known better. I have sat through 3 or 4 of these courses. They focused on areas such as excavations and the installation of scaffolding that were of no relevance to me.

Exactly. Most of the time, Safe pass is concentrating almost exclusively on how to lift a 25 Kg sack of cement safely, excavations, scaffolding, how to correctly use a chemical bog and leave it non hazardous for the next unfortunate visitor, and other building site related matters. 99% of that has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to an established large distribution warehouse that is loading trucks with barrels and the like.

I think that the regualtions (ET101) themselves are good. We just need to have them enforced across the board.

No disagreement here, it would be so much simpler if anyone could get access to them, and then have a wider based scheme that would require ANYONE that does work on certain areas to provide "appropriate" documentation which can be stored, examined, used as evidence, whatever else.

If the Customer knew that it was a mandatory requirement to provide a statement of work carried out, rather than a certificate, which would have to be kept for the life of the installation, then maybe self certification would work, but the problem as I see it now is that there are a lot of customers that don't want or care about any form of paperwork for jobs done on a system.

Perhaps the answer is for every MPRN to have a log book which the customer has to ensure is completed on any occasion when work is done to the system that is covered by that MPRN, and that would include "minor works" carried out by the customer,. The Log could be kept near the meter, and checked for presence by the meter reader when they read it.

In the same vein, it should be relatively simple now to have a facility that would allow the meter to "log" things like earth leakage currents above a certain level, and if the "flag" is on when the reader takes the reading, that gets reported back to the central base, and acts as a flag for maybe a site visit, or an unannounced inspection, or whatever is appropriate. That would provide an early warning of things that were perhaps not yet a problem, but are going in that direction, or a clue to work carried out that is inappropriate or not to spec.

tomdempsey200

what does Joe public need wiring rules for?

there's arguments both ways

you get untrained persons then trying to interpret rules

brightspark

Are the regs available in the reference section of any of the larger libraries?

But they are a nightmare to read even with experience.

brightspark

Irish Steve wrote: »

In the same vein, it should be relatively simple now to have a facility that would allow the meter to "log" things like earth leakage currents above a certain level, and if the "flag" is on when the reader takes the reading, that gets reported back to the central base, and acts as a flag for maybe a site visit, or an unannounced inspection, or whatever is appropriate. That would provide an early warning of things that were perhaps not yet a problem, but are going in that direction, or a clue to work carried out that is inappropriate or not to spec.

Earth leakage won't occur with many serious faults.

Perhaps when periodic inspections are brought in (every 5-10 years for domestic) issues will get identified and hopefully rectified too...will be interesting to see how people react when told their house electrics will need the equivalent of an NCT. :eek:

2011

Irish Steve wrote: »

No disagreement here, it would be so much simpler if anyone could get access to them

Anyone can buy them from the ETCI.

http://www.etci.ie/publications/onlinestore.html

They are a bit pricey, but remember the ETCI committee work on a voluntary basis.

and then have a wider based scheme that would require ANYONE that does work on certain areas to provide "appropriate" documentation which can be stored, examined, used as evidence, whatever else.

Completion certs are now issued electronically. You can be sure that they are stored for future reference.

If the Customer knew that it was a mandatory requirement to provide a statement of work carried out, rather than a certificate, which would have to be kept for the life of the installation, then maybe self certification would work, but the problem as I see it now is that there are a lot of customers that don't want or care about any form of paperwork for jobs done on a system.

Most nontechnical people would not understand a completion certificate. The other problem is that many certs have been filled out with false readings.

A recent TV advertisement campaign by CER has been informing people that they should be issued with a completion certificate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ch6-sQFq0_w

Perhaps the answer is for every MPRN to have a log book which the customer has to ensure is completed on any occasion when work is done to the system that is covered by that MPRN, and that would include "minor works" carried out by the customer,. The Log could be kept near the meter, and checked for presence by the meter reader when they read it.

It would be easier to have 3rd party certification.

In the same vein, it should be relatively simple now to have a facility that would allow the meter to "log" things like earth leakage currents above a certain level, and if the "flag" is on when the reader takes the reading, that gets reported back to the central base, and acts as a flag for maybe a site visit, or an unannounced inspection, or whatever is appropriate.

This would be expensive and troublesome. Some devices have a relatively high leakage current under normal operation, nonlinear loads such as UPS, VSD's, washing machines and inverters in general.

Some serious issues may have no earth leakage, such as an overload condition or a short between neutral and phase.

I think RCDs do this job just fine

2011

brightspark wrote: »

Perhaps when periodic inspections are brought in (every 5-10 years for domestic) issues will get identified and hopefully rectified too...will be interesting to see how people react when told their house electrics will need the equivalent of an NCT. :eek:

Yes, I can see insurance companies looking for this at some stage in the future.

My prediction: It may start with something a 10% discount on home insurance for those that have a certificate of heath for their wiring. In time everyone will be forced to have the relevant cert or insurance will be unaffordable.

tomdempsey200

bizarre how the insurance haven't clamped down

I think they have a get-out for badly maintained houses

would that cover electrical as well as structural maintenance?

2011

tomdempsey200 wrote: »

bizarre how the insurance haven't clamped down

Perhaps it is not that bizarre.

I will bet that when their assessor investigates a fire caused by poor electrics they are actively looking for any way to wriggle out of paying up.

If an insurance company can demonstrate that you have been grossly negligent by having dangerous wiring they may be able to pay out a reduced amount or nothing at all.

I am sure that the legal eagles working for insurance companies have all sorts of clauses in the terms & conditions fine print.

tomdempsey200

I think so

they certainly have for other maintenance

.G.

We've been doing quite a few periodic inspections at the behest of insurance companies lately,mostly domestic too.Properties are rented out.

Sir Arthur Daley

Is there a concern amongst the public that registered electrical contractors are failing to comply with regulations?

tomdempsey200

WikiHow wrote: »

Is there a concern amongst the public that registered electrical contractors are failing to comply with regulations?

i wouldn't think so

but the reality is unscrupulous contractors will cut corners if each job is not being inspected

Sir Arthur Daley

Is there a concern that alot of registered electrical contractors are unscrupulous contractors?

tomdempsey200

WikiHow wrote: »

Is there a concern that alot of registered electrical contractors are unscrupulous contractors?

what's your concern?

corners are cut...human nature and all that

2011

WikiHow wrote: »

Is there a concern that alot of registered electrical contractors are unscrupulous contractors?

Your guess is as good as mine.

I imagine that certain contractors from all of trades caused concern/ upset/ disappointment/ p!$$ed off many people, particularly during the boom.

Sir Arthur Daley

My concern is that maybe people are mixing up contractors doing untidy work and not the issue of non complying with regulations, e.g a contractor who runs cables untidy in attic, sockets not at same levels which looks terrible in tiled kitchen splash back etc, i know of contractors who got a bad name for this and although there work may be untidy the work they did was safe and followed regs, the merge of bad/poor quality installation work should not be mixed up with non compliance with regs as i saw in those cases.

tomdempsey200

WikiHow wrote: »

My concern is that maybe people are mixing up contractors doing untidy work and not the issue of non complying with regulations, e.g a contractor who runs cables untidy in attic,

that is non-compliance

attic cables have to be laid in an 'orderly' manner

fred funk }{

WikiHow wrote: »

My concern is that maybe people are mixing up contractors doing untidy work and not the issue of non complying with regulations, e.g a contractor who runs cables untidy in attic, sockets not at same levels which looks terrible in tiled kitchen splash back etc, i know of contractors who got a bad name for this and although there work may be untidy the work they did was safe and followed regs, the merge of bad/poor quality installation work should not be mixed up with non compliance with regs as i saw in those cases.

I would suggest that someone who's work is sloppy and untidy is like that throughout their entire work practices.