Electrical Certificate after TT earthing

[asalcedo]

I have changed from non-working TN-S to TT earthing at home.

All has gone well. My thanks to the great contributions in this forum.

One question. The electrician is asking 150 pounds for each of the three consumer units replaced (total of 450 pounds) to issue three certificates for the works done.

I have paid him by the day and he says the day rate did not include the certificate.

We have been measuring everything for each circuit and the results were very good. I have been overseeing the works and am confident that all is well and done to the highest standard with the best parts I found. Plus no nuisance trips so far.

The question is. What do I need these certificates for?

I do not intend to sell the house in the foreseeable future.

Would the 450 pounds be money well spent?

Thanks,

Antonio

[Tim Watts]

On Thursday 01 August 2013 18:03 asalcedo wrote in uk.d-i-y:

In theory, he's done all the final circuit tests and the earthing tests as part of the work (otherwise his work would be intrinsically unsafe).

So charging 150 *each* to fill out the certs with the numbers he already has and pass it via his notification scheme so the LBA gets a registered set does seem a bit steep.

I'm not sure his professional body will like him working this way.

How many circuits have you got from these three CUs?

[Andrew Mawson]

Tell him to sling his hook, or whatever the current phrase is - he's taking the p*** .

I had a sparky recently do a fixed labour price alteration to two cottages. Halfway through he said it would be much easier for him if we replaced one of the CUs with a new one. I let him, accepting the increase in materials. When he presented his bill he wanted to charge an extra £100 for the CU change over and above the fixed labour price. I'll let you guess whether I paid him the increase. (But I did make sure that the certificates were in MY hand when I gave him the good news.) Amazingly colourful language ensued

AWEM

[Fredxx]

It would be cheaper to go through Building Control, and you'd get an independent assessment of the work done.

[ARW]

Why are you posting here when you already have an electrician?

[Tim Watts]

On Thursday 01 August 2013 20:08 Phil L wrote in uk.d-i-y:

He did say "he said it would be much easier for him if we replaced one of the CUs with a new one".

There seems to be a reasonable expectation that the labour is reduced, not increased so only a meterials surcharge would be expected.

If he really meant "it would be better for you to have a new CU" he should have said so and been clear about the cost implications.

[Bob Eager]

I thought that on first reading. Then I noticed the bit that said "he said it would be much easier for him if we replaced one of the CUs..."

[David.WE.Roberts]

You would, of course, then be liable for destroying the CU since the customer had paid for it.

Apart from criminal damage and loss of enjoyment whilst the power was out, you should also cop for the cost of someone else repairing all the damage.

Possibly not the wisest of strategies.

Cheers

Dave R

[asalcedo]

I have 24 circuits in total

[John Rumm]

Tell him not to bother!

Under the new part P rules you can have a third party test and certify if required, and I would expect you could get a complete inspection done for less.

However I would be inclined to ask him which certification body he belongs to (hopefully giving him the impression that you might ask them if that sounds like a reasonable way of working)

I can't see any reason why it would not...

In this circumstance, nothing really.

Not IMHO.

[Dave Liquorice]

Agreed £450 for three bits of paper that only conveyancing solicitors will ever want to look at. If it comes to selling, "the work was done by a qualified spark" (true), "Certificates? We never got any certificates" (true). The latter is just being a bit economical with the real truth.

TBH I'd expect all certification and any associated costs to be all part of the quote for the work. I think we have decided this is notifiable work, so certs etc are a legal obligation. So it's reasonable to assume that all related costs for the work are in the quote.

Now if the spark had mentioned that the quote didn't include certification at the begining that's different matter.

[asalcedo]

Exactly, I was surprised the certificates were not included.

When he gave me a quote for the full job, parts and labour, it did mention that the certification was included.

He only told me that the daily rate did not include certification after he had accepted working on a daily rate and had started the job.

[Tim Watts]

On Friday 02 August 2013 07:53 asalcedo wrote in uk.d-i-y:

That lies somewhere between being naughty and pulling a fast one.

[Andy Wade]

Not yet, AFAIK. Yes, provision for this is in the Part P legislation and the Approved Document, but I don't think there are any registered

3rd-party inspectors yet. The original intention was to have a scheme in place by the Autumn of this year. [1] For legal reasons, the government needs to set up new third party certification schemes, under which inspectors will need to be registered. Those wishing to operate inspection schemes will need to apply to DCLG for authorisation once a framework is in place early next year [i.e. 2013], with the schemes expected to come into effect in the autumn. Members of third party inspection schemes will need to demonstrate competence in inspection and testing, and membership will not just be open to Part P scheme registrants. DCLG will be looking to industry to help develop competence requirements for assessment purposes. The ESC is likely to be invited to join a working party, along with some of the Part P scheme operators. Electrical installers (DIY or trade) using a third party inspector will not need to notify a building control body before carrying out work or pay building control body fees. The third party inspector will, if satisfied with the work, notify compliance with Building Regulations. Inspectors will need to 'take all reasonable steps' to determine whether or not work complies with the Building Regulations - the same requirement as currently applies to building control bodies. Professional Indemnity insurance will be a requirement. The liability for defective work will lie with the installer, not the inspector (unless negligent).

See also

(page 7)

[1]

[John Rumm]

Interesting - I had not appreciated they were planning a whole new layer of complexity to implement this... Why am I not surprised?

Still in the OPs case, its only something that he might need some time in the future, so they may have figured it out by then. ;-)

[Brian Gaff]

Sounds to me like he does not really want the hassle so he is pricing it at a ridiculously high rate hoping you are either a mug, or will not bother him to do the admin.

Brian

[Terry Fields]

When I sold my house there were two relevant questions on the solicitor's form:

- Have the electrical circuits been modified in any way since 2005? Y/N

- Are cerificates available for this work? Y/N

I answered truthfully Y and N respectively, and that was it, house sold.

[Fredxx]

There is a presumption that work is done up to standard by a professional in that the law has been observed.

In the absence of a certificate, a letter from the solicitor will recommend to the prospective buyer that the electrics are surveyed at some point.

Even solicitors know the likelihood of death or serious injury from fixed wiring defects is remarkably low.

[Tony Bryer]

Same when I sold up in 2008