Electrical Danger Notice!!! Client Seriously Not Happy

[a1]

And remember to use the "qualified electrician" statement with etreme caution.

If you have the quals, including the NVQ3 and AM2 - then you will have no issues.

Wasn't there someone, who started a thread on this forum, who showed a link to a courtcase?

 

[apprentice87]

Hi Steps,

There are three parts to a contract; Unless all three are present, there is no contract..

These are;

1, An offer; I will do whatever, give you whatever.

2, An acceptance; Oooh, yes ok!

Now, both parties have to be clear about what is on offer, or there is no contract.

If i want to buy ten tons of wood, and it turns out that it is ten tons of sawdust, then there is no contract, because that was not what i intended to buy, when i entered into the contract.

In the same way, if you contract to replace a plug socket, but then you rewire the house, do not expect to get paid, as this is not the "offer" that the householder "accepted"

Finally, a "consideration"

Basically, this means that you have to be getting paid. For example; If i sell you an item, and it turns out to be faulty, you can sue me, because the goods did not "conform to contract" They did not perform as intended.

If however, i GAVE the item to you, then there is no contract, and so you can do nothing [as common sense would suggest]

If i gave you a car with faulty brakes, you could definitely not sue me for that in the same way as you could if you had bought the car from me, but i presume you could sue me for negligence instead, as giving someone a car that you are aware that they are going to use, knowing that the brakes were faulty, would obviously be negligent, you could reasonably forsee that there might be an accident.

One thing to be very careful of though; Many years ago, case law established [and i do not know if this is still the case] that if a "professional" person gave you his advice on a subject, then he had to stand by that advice, and indeed, could be sued if he made a mistake, EVEN IF HE GAVE HIS ADVICE FOR FREE....

john....

 

[ivixxiv]

What happened with this, both Sreetlighter's have been on the forum since and not touched this thread

 

[husky2013]

Never heard anything bk from the client apart from the 1 phone call and we have left it at that!

 

[Sharpend]

Having had a read through I think this post highlights the need to be extremely aware of your own actions and more importantly the consequences of those actions. I think if the lady whose house you condemned had been of the fighting sort you may of found yourself with a whole bigger problem than was necessary. Perhaps first rule is to attempt diplomacy through verbal discussion followed then by a supporting letter. Ultimately I see it that as long as you have outlined your concerns with the install then you have covered yourself from any comeback.

Unlike gas engineers (afaik) we still do not have the authority to disconnect the supply, so therefore in my opinion a diplomatic letter is just as good as an EDN. May even lead to remedial work. An EDN in this example will do no more than to inflame a situation.

 

[shed69]

When the government see a bit of common sense and start enforcing regs etc and make homeowners have to carry out EICR's at the suggested intervals then and only then will the properties in this country be safer places .... And I'm not saying any old spark should be allowed to do them either for

 

[Phoenix]

When the government see a bit of common sense and start enforcing regs etc and make homeowners have to carry out EICR's at the suggested intervals then and only then will the properties in this country be safer places

Quite simply because domestic electrical installations don't cause any where near another deaths and accidents to lumber the public with the cost burden of it all. It would be unpopular and a vote looser and not increase electrical safety by any significant margin!

As far insurance companies... why does anyone need to 'get' them to do anything, the whole concept of insurance is based on the insurers accepting a certain risk for a certain fee or imposing such restrictions as they deem neccesary to offer a product. More risk = higher the cost of insurance. Why should the government tie down what risks they are allowed to accept, and tye their hands over what is in the grand scheme of things a minor risk overall?. If they wanted to the insursers could offer a discount for a satisfactory EICR on the property... however the amount of discount would probably not amount to more than a fiver and the admin would outweight that, no one would go for it, etc.

Cars, motorcycles, ladders, staircases and chip pans are much more dangerous. Perhaps medical insurance should only be given to people who live and bunglows and house insurance to those who throw out their chip pans...

EDIT: Spelling

 

[streetlighter]

Well I've decided I'm sick of domestic electrical work, sticking to my highway lighting can make more money for less work and less stress.

 

[SPECIAL LOCATION]

Quite simply because domestic electrical installations don't cause any where near another deaths and agents to lumber the public with the cost burden of it all. It would be unpopular and a vote looser and not increase electrical safety by any significant margin!As far insurance companies... why does anyone need to 'get' them to do anything, the whole concept of insurance is based on the insurers accepting a certain risk for a certain fee or imposing such restrictions as they deem neccesary to offer a product. More risk = higher the cost of insurance. Why should the government tie down what risks they are allowed to accept, and tye their hands over what is in the grand scheme of things a minor risk overall?. If they wanted to the insursers could offer a discount for a satisfactory EICR on the property... however the amount of discount would probably not amount to more than a fiver and the admin would outweight that, no one would go for it, etc.

Cars, motorcycles, ladders, staircases and chip pans are much more dangerous. Perhaps medical insurance should only be given to people who live and bunglows and house insurance to those who throw out their chip pans...

To expand this theme a little bit....

I don't actually have any statistics but I bet motor vehicles and their miss-use or accidents cause more serious injury's and deaths in this country than any domestic electrical work.....

So lets look at the example from the motor industry...

Age limits and tests to pass before being allowed to drive..

We should all be purchasing compulsory MOT's, insurance, road Tax etc..

And we ALL know that EVERYBODY does..

cuz you never hear of uninsured, untaxed, unMOT'ed vehicles being driven by underage drivers who have not passed a test do we???

So what makes anyone think another branch of unenforceable legislation for the electrical industry would make any difference!?

:C

:coat

 

[shed69]

Absolute rubbish Phoenix, it's not just about deaths either is it, what about serious burns and injuries? What constitutes "not enough" ??? As for insurance, do you not have to have an mot then on a vehicle to get insured???

Simple, you live in a house, you pay bills and mortgages etc, why would a couple of hundred pound to find out the state of electrics be such a cost, I personally don't believe it is a big cost, 200-300 quid over 10 year???? Nothing is it? and remember although the house may belong to you now, it certainly won't for very long when it's sold or left to family, would you want to be responsible for the death or serious injury of a future owner? I know I wouldn't ......

I like your idea of discount for satisfactory , so yeah up the insurance premium by the average cost in the area of an EICR and knock it off if it's carried out and deemed satisfactory.... If its a potentially dangerous property then tough luck - do something to get it back up to safe working service or pay additional costs every year on insuring it... If you were an insurance agent would you want to insure something that is unsafe and high risk that your going to fork out when the inevitable happens? Make people make their homes safe this way.....

---------- Post Auto-Merged at 14:21 ---------- Previous post was made at 14:15 ----------

Special location, it wouldn't eradicate it completely but it would make it much more difficult for people, like non insured drivers-eventually they get caught out....usually the hard way ....

Part P was brought in and look where that got us - nowhere pretty much as far as I'm concerned cos there is no way of policing it is there?

But through an "MOT" EICR type of attack there would be.....

 

[Graham Lister]

Absolute rubbish Phoenix, it's not just about deaths either is it, what about serious burns and injuries? What constitutes "not enough" ??? As for insurance, do you not have to have an mot then on a vehicle to get insured??? A vehicle does not need an MOT to be insured, this is a common misconception. The electrical industry does not need compulsory eicr reports. It would never work and the cost of making it compulsory could not be justified as the accident figures don't warrant it.

 

[wozz]

A few people have said the customer could have taken it further if they were the fighting type? how exactly? for giving a bit of advice that the customer wants to ignore? I just cant see anyhting coming from it.

 

[Sharpend]

Wozz, I was referring to: if the customer was now having issues with the insurance company as I think was implied. Then they may gave grounds of an argument particularly if supported by a second opinion.

Generally you'd find that most people are full of hot air in these situations, and nothing much then materialises.

 

[shed69]

A vehicle does not need an MOT to be insured, this is a common misconception. The electrical industry does not need compulsory eicr reports. It would never work and the cost of making it compulsory could not be justified as the accident figures don't warrant it.

I would have thought you do .....if you have insurance on a car that has no mot(except under 3 year old cars obviously) then you will be void on your insurance should you have an accident...... The car would be deemed as unroadworthy which is probably why the vehicles owner decided not to have one......! Are you sure about that comment Lister? I know if you don't have valid mot then you get fixed penalty notice from police and your insurance would be void....????

---------- Post Auto-Merged at 19:17 ---------- Previous post was made at 19:16 ----------

*****1st paragraph is quote from post 51 - Graham Lister*****

 

[wozz]

and why is that because they have fallen foul of the small print? that cant be the fault of someone brining it to the homeowners attention a potentially dangerous situation may exist and a full inspection maybe necessary?

Would any of this stand up in court? when can u issue them then? when you have cast iron evidence work has not been carried out to any edition of the regs? I havnt heard of a court case involving these situations.

You second sentence is very true.

---------- Post Auto-Merged at 19:20 ---------- Previous post was made at 19:18 ----------

A vehicle does not need an MOT to be insured, this is a common misconception. The electrical industry does not need compulsory eicr reports. It would never work and the cost of making it compulsory could not be justified as the accident figures don't warrant it.I would have thought you do .....if you have insurance on a car that has no mot(except under 3 year old cars obviously) then you will be void on your insurance should you have an accident...... The car would be deemed as unroadworthy which is probably why the vehicles owner decided not to have one......! Are you sure about that comment Lister? I know if you don't have valid mot then you get fixed penalty notice from police and your insurance would be void....????

---------- Post Auto-Merged at 19:17 ---------- Previous post was made at 19:16 ----------

*****1st paragraph is quote from post 51 - Graham Lister*****

And how do you get the car to the MOT station?

 

[steptoe]

my bike is insured to be used on a public road and it doesnt have an MOT,

and yes, it is over 3 years old.

 

[shed69]

It's only when it comes up to 4 year when you have it done.... If your riding your bike/car on a public road without mot then your in the wrong...... You have to declare it sorn if no mot BUT insurance may well let you insure it as it may still be of a value ..... However you cannot ride on public road... I just asked my sister who has only ever worked in insurance for 10 year and has been a police officer for the last 10..... Check it out steptoe, you don't wanna get caught out....!!!

 

[Andy™]

not everything on the road requires an MOT.

also, you dont legally have to have insurance either.

 

[shed69]

Well, I'm not sure about that Andy, but you must have something in mind ,possibly classic cars exempt are they?

 

[Andy™]

Well, I'm not sure about that Andy, but you must have something in mind ,possibly classic cars exempt are they?

after a very brief google

a Motor tractors

b Track-laying vehicles

c Articulated vehicles that are not buses (Bendi buses) or lorries

d Works trucks

e Invalid carriages weighing no more than 306kg when unloaded

f Vehicles used only to pass from land occupied by the person keeping the vehicle to other land occupied by them, and not travelling on the road for more than a total of six miles a week

g Hackney carriages or private-hire vehicles licensed by local authorities authorised to check the roadworthiness of these vehicles

h Hackney carriages (vehicles licensed to carry passengers) getting tax discs from Transport for London

i Vehicles provided for police purposes and maintained in an approved workshop

j Goods vehicles powered by electricity

k Trams

l Trolley vehicles that are not auxiliary trolley vehicles (auxiliary trolley vehicles are vehicles that are adapted to run from power provided from a source on board when it is not running from power from some outside source)

m Vehicles authorised to be used on the road by a Special Types General Order made under Section 44(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1988

n Vehicles used only on certain islands that do not have a bridge, tunnel, ford or other suitable way for motor vehicles to be conveniently driven to a road in any part of Great Britain

source