EICRs

(2) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (1)(b) ?at regular intervals? means? (a) at intervals of no more than 5 years; or (b) where the most recent report under sub-paragraph (3)(a) requires such inspection and testing to be at intervals of less than 5 years, at the intervals specified in that report.

Certificates I have seen recommend an interval until the next test but don't go further than 'recommend'. We may have to wait and see what the courts say about that, but a prudent landlord would abide by whatever the EICR says, however it is worded!

Maybe, Robin can explain why I'm wrong.

You are not wrong. You have just helped me.

Thanks.

I don't think you are. There are other bits of the regs which suggest the people who instructed on them* didn't really understand the subject and had failed to consult on the details. The bit you quote above (reg

He is not alone. But I think he and others who agree with him have misread reg 3(2)(c). You quoted that in t'other post but for ease of ref:

"(b) ensure every electrical installation in the residential premises is inspected and tested at regular intervals by a qualified person; and

(c) ensure the first inspection and testing is carried out?

(i) before the tenancy commences in relation to a new specified tenancy; or

(ii) by 1st April 2021 in relation to an existing specified tenancy."

Some people read as meaning the "first inspection and testing FOR THE NEW TENANCY is...". What that overlooks is the fact that some landlords had never had an EICR on their property. So to avoid a massive demand for EICRs as soon as the regs came into force (i) required an EICR on a new tenancy and (ii) gave until this April for everyone else.

It's sloppy. I like to think I'd have suggested we define "first inspection" to make clear it is "first the landlord has had for the property" rather than "first for the tenancy". But that may be 20:20 hindsight.

Anyhow, IMHO there's no room for doubt when one also looks at reg

"(e) supply a copy of the most recent report to?

(i) any new tenant of the specified tenancy to which the report relates before that tenant occupies those premises; and

(ii) any prospective tenant within 28 days of receiving a request in writing for it from that prospective tenant."

The use of "most recent report" is totally at odds with the notion that every new tenant gets a new, first report.

I am sad but not surprised if the CPSs have not given better guidance on this.

I've thought of another issue that you might like to put to him.

Many HMOs involve just one (joint) tenancy - eg where students or other friends are sharing. But other HMOs are let on the basis of several sole tenancies - one for each room. So every time a room is re-let there's a new tenancy. A new EICR for every new tenancy could mean several a year for the same installation.

OTOH I'd expect landlords to do a walk-through on such a change to check for damage to sockets etc. So he could pitch for that work on the basis of him also replacing such sockets etc on the spot and then providing a short report.

That is interesting and something I wasn't aware of. Forewarned I might be tempted to ask for the justification of why another inspection within the 5 years.

Perhaps Adam can provide possible reasons?

Does the need for a EICR cover lodgers, who are normally there under a licence rather than a tenancy?

No. Excluded by para 2 of Schedule 1. Or see the official guidance from HMG at

The guidance includes their best effort to wriggle round the way they went ahead with a regulation that mandates "the electrical safety standards" of the 18th edition despite admitting that they never intended to require landlords to replace every plastic CU etc.

I've never been a landlord, but is there really a risk of sockets getting damaged from year to year? Possibly yellowing over decades of use, but I don't see how a socket that passed an EICR a year or two ago is suddenly going to become broken - unless the tenant is in the habit of wielding a baseball bat?

Obviously anything that is spotted as being broken should be replaced, but I don't see it coming up high on the list of risks compared with, say, faulty or expired smoke alarms.

Theo

Thanks, those seem default times rather than having any basis of requirement.

I was under the initial understanding that there might a specific type of installation that might require a more frequent inspection than 5 years.

Interesting, so if you have 4 or more lodgers then it's a HMO, below that and you don't need an EICR.

It is strange how social housing are exempt, all all the tenancies that might well require a periodic inspection, that would be one.

How do you become a Social Housing provider? :-)

That link says, "Ensure national standards for electrical safety are met. These are set out in the 18th edition of the ?Wiring Regulations?, which are published as British Standard 7671."

Now, to my knowledge these may be standards but the standard allows for deviations that can be justified. In other words it is reasonable to argue the rules within BS 7671 are more a guide to good practice rather than a set of prescribed rules.

Dunno. AFAICS:

a. these regs simply exclude lodgers as defined in Schedule 1

b. it doesn't matter in these regs if it's an HMO or not

c. these regs also abolished the separate requirement for EICRs for HMOs;

BUT

d. resident landlords with >2 lodgers may have an HMO and be required to certificate their safety and be subject to separate licensing conditions.

I could well be wrong as it seems a daft result. But then these regs were widely seen as a mess. (As also was the guidance which the Government issued and withdrew twice).

Robin reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

I'd be interested to read how the following example can be construed as "more a guide to good practice rather than a set of prescribed rules".

(i) have their enclosure manufactured from non-combustible material, or

(ii) be enclosed in a cabinet or enclosure constructed of non-combustible material and complying with Regulation 132.12.

It's perhaps not a coincidence that everything do with electrical installations has been a rushed mess ever since the introduction of Part P.

I don't have the 17th or 18th edition at hand, but there are comments on the design of a system that precede those paragraphs which can include deviations.

I do work for a large Housing Assn. Yes, it is true, we do not have to do any periodic electrical inspections, or even provide a smoke detector in the properties. But we do. On change of Tenancy, a full inspection is carried out.

The onus on the HA is to provide a suitable means of keeping the houses in a safe condition. With 10 houses, periodic maintenance would be sufficient. With 19000, it gets far more complicated, so Inspections are carried out, and smoke detectors are fitted to the latest Private Landlord Regs. - detector up and downstairs,in the living room, kitchen, and a CO in anywhere with a gas burning appliance. Periodic Electrical Inspections are not carried out on a 5 yearly basis, it is left to the Tenant to ask for it to be done, or, when we visit to repair something, we note that it needs Inspecting. There are very few of the properties that do not meet 17th Ed.(original) Regs. There are still a lot of plastic CU's around, these are marked as a C3 on an inspection. No need to change it if it still works well. As far as smoke detectors are concerned, I've seen the stats that show that social housing has a very low rate of fires damaging the properties, private rented accomodation has a far higher figure.