PAT - Would you pass or fail these appliances?

Hi!

I'm looking for opinions on whether you would pass or fail the appliances below.. 

Both appliances have been tested and are OK with the only issues noted below.

Appliance 1,  Washing Machine - Bottom cover does not clip on 

Appliance 2, Microwave  - Unclean 

Why would you fail an electrical rest if the item is dirty?

Murdoch said:

Why would you fail an electrical rest if the item is dirty?

Click to expand...

I wouldn’t... I’m currently having a refusal of payment due to the above being passed, another electrician has gone in behind and picked it up on a visit saying they both should have been failed. 

Conor Chapple said:

I wouldn’t... I’m currently having a refusal of payment due to the above being passed, another electrician has gone in behind and picked it up on a visit saying they both should have been failed. 

Click to expand...

It's a bit like failing a car on the MOT because it's dirty.

Stand your ground, you need to be paid

Just looked at the photo's on my laptop - so this other "electrician" - what is precisely wrong ?

Murdoch said:

Just looked at the photo's on my laptop - so this other "electrician" - what is precisely wrong ?

Click to expand...

Baring in mind this other electrician re-tested the properties two months after myself it’s hard to confirm his findings.

He is claiming the orange in the microwave is rust although it can be clearly seen to be on the worktop which doesn’t make sense to me if it was rust. 
 

As for the washing machine his exact quote was “The door won’t lock or shut properly” along with the picture above which doesn't much to go on.

rapparee said:

It's a bit like failing a car on the MOT because it's dirty.

Click to expand...

dont think it applies to a car but on a truck if its dirty to the point of it cant be inspected correctly (i.e mud covering components) then it wont be accepted for test

Arguably the build up of  dirt on the microwave could affect the RF sealing so I would be inclined to fail it. 

OR - Does your PAT procedure include a leakage test?  

The washing machine appears just a piece of trim broken loose, so PROVIDED that doesn't expose any live components or moving parts then it's a pass.

Conor Chapple said:

Baring in mind this other electrician re-tested the properties two months after myself it’s hard to confirm his findings.

Click to expand...

So you've waited over 2 months for payment?

Murdoch said:

So you've waited over 2 months for payment?

Click to expand...

The tests were completed back in July, they’ve always been slow at paying so it’s not unusual to wait 1-2 months to be paid for specific invoices to which I didn’t mind. It has been quite a while since they were carried out however Im enquiring on here now as I’m in the process of going through the small claims court so I thought I’d hear people out so I can figure out the best route to go.

Conor Chapple said:

Baring in mind this other electrician re-tested the properties two months after myself it’s hard to confirm his findings.

He is claiming the orange in the microwave is rust although it can be clearly seen to be on the worktop which doesn’t make sense to me if it was rust. 
 

As for the washing machine his exact quote was “The door won’t lock or shut properly” along with the picture above which doesn't much to go on.

Click to expand...

I assumed it was tomato sauce. 

However just because they may be faulty two months later doesn't mean that they weren't rusty damaged at the time of your test.

This reminds me of something that I was asked to do quite a few years ago.

I was asked by someone to PAT some appliances that might have been subject to an insurance claim following a leak from above.

Each item passed all the tests, however I still wrote a report stating that IMHO the items should be replaced... the reason being that the leak was from the soil pipe of the toilet and the items were a kettle, toaster and microwave..... so while they were electrically safe they were not hygienic by a long shot

If you are going legal then I would just stick with them being OK when you tested them. End of story.  The fact that they were found defective some time later is in my opinion irrelevant.

No-one can dispute your results unless doing so at exactly the same time.

I cant help feeling there is more to this than we are being told.... :C

The costs for PAT'ing two appliances can't be a fat lot of money to warrant any court action?

( Or is there is actually a whole lot more they are disputing ?)..

How many customers would actually complain about getting a 'Pass' rather than a 'Fail'?

Most would only dispute a 'Fail'  when they thought it should 'Pass'?

( Or is it a landlord wanting a formal report to charge a tenant for miss-use of appliances ?)

If they are just disputing two appliances as part of a larger job..

I would probably have just knocked the cost of those to items off the overall bill.

and asked them to pay the balance..

As the hassle & effort to chase 2x PAT costs would not be worth my time.

Also I would never have such long open-ended payment terms..

Cash-Flow is the key to a successful business...

Thousands of companies have gone to the wall with full order-books and plenty of work in progress..

BUT negligible cash-flow! 

Have you already issued written late-payment invoices etc.. 

with 'signed for' receipts confirming they have received your bill..?

As without that, it can complicate any legal claims..

:coffee   

SPECIAL LOCATION said:

I cant help feeling there is more to this than we are being told.... :C

The costs for PAT'ing two appliances can't be a fat lot of money to warrant any court action?

( Or is there is actually a whole lot more they are disputing ?)..

How many customers would actually complain about getting a 'Pass' rather than a 'Fail'?

Most would only dispute a 'Fail'  when they thought it should 'Pass'?

( Or is it a landlord wanting a formal report to charge a tenant for miss-use of appliances ?)

If they are just disputing two appliances as part of a larger job..

I would probably have just knocked the cost of those to items off the overall bill.

and asked them to pay the balance..

As the hassle & effort to chase 2x PAT costs would not be worth my time.

Also I would never have such long open-ended payment terms..

Cash-Flow is the key to a successful business...

Thousands of companies have gone to the wall with full order-books and plenty of work in progress..

BUT negligible cash-flow! 

Have you already issued written late-payment invoices etc.. 

with 'signed for' receipts confirming they have received your bill..?

As without that, it can complicate any legal claims..

:coffee   

Click to expand...

Yes the two items were part of a two separate larger invoices so they are withholding the full amount totalling around £800ish. They are saying based on those two items everything needs to re-tested by this electrician which I can only assume was his suggestion.

The client never informed or at least made me aware of the issues it was only after I chased up the original invoices they refused payment. The issues were brought up after another electrician noticed them at a later date after my original test. Even after they made the client aware they did not discuss with me or allow me to rectify/retest the two items.

Due to the fact the problems we’re not present on my date of testing and that they never allowed me a chance to make good or even discuss the problem I’m hopeful to have a good case of it comes to it and yes I do have a full paper trail of invoices, certificates and email conversations. 

Conor Chapple said:

Yes the two items were part of a two separate larger invoices so they are withholding the full amount totalling around £800ish. They are saying based on those two items everything needs to re-tested by this electrician which I can only assume was his suggestion.

The client never informed or at least made me aware of the issues it was only after I chased up the original invoices they refused payment. The issues were brought up after another electrician noticed them at a later date after my original test. Even after they made the client aware they did not discuss with me or allow me to rectify/retest the two items.

Due to the fact the problems we’re not present on my date of testing and that they never allowed me a chance to make good or even discuss the problem I’m hopeful to have a good case of it comes to it and yes I do have a full paper trail of invoices, certificates and email conversations. 

Click to expand...

Absolutely agree that with any contractual disputes, the original contractor must first be given the chance to remedy any areas of disagreement...

And due to the nature of this work it is quite possible an appliance has deteriorated since your visit..

Just like an MOT on car..

On garage gives it a PASS..

But a car could be re-tested a month later somewhere else and it fails due to chipped windscreen..  Indicator lamp failed...  low tread on two front tyres.. etc.. etc..

Doesn't mean the original MOT test was wrong..

These are both appliances that can have wear and tear due to normal usage..

and I don't think anyone can offer much significant input to the condition of an appliance purely from some photos over the internet..

But if they felt something was unsatisfactory.. they should have raised it with you..

Not wait for you to chase payment.

That said..

I would have been chasing payment much sooner!

Guinness     

I would say that this is not the kind of Client you want to continue working with, so don't waste time trying to save the relationship. 
Write a pre-legal letter giving them an opportunity to make the payment (and offer to knock off the sum for 2 x appliance tests as a measure of goodwill) otherwise you will submit a claim to the Small Claims Court. 

I also include a statement on my invoices that any disputes must be raised within 7 days to avoid this type of thing.

Few additional thoughts..

[ you may already know..  or they may just nudge you with a bit more ammunition for getting your money! ]

AND...  Just to point out: I tend to avoid any PAT work, except for a very small number of previous known good customers who are willing to pay a realistic price for my time!

{ far too many el-cheapo, semi-skilled or non-skilled PAT button pushers going around doing stupid cheap prices per item of equipment, to compete with!!! }

1/ Don't forget PAT procedures are guidance..   NOT a statutory set of instructions..

So there is an element of individual interpretation by the inspector.

(Just as with Periodic Inspection & Testing).

2/  Do you have a copy of the current code of practice for "in service inspection & test of electrical equipment"..    {which is the posh name for PAT}

As as far as I can see it either has changed or is due to change?     

Notes on the 4th edition

https://www.pat-testing-training.net/articles/iet-code-of-practice-changes.php

Notes on the 5th edition

https://electrical.theiet.org/wiring-matters/years/2020/81-july-2020/the-all-new-5th-edition-of-the-iet-code-of-practice-for-in-service-inspection-and-testing-of-electrical-equipment/

Due for publication Sept 2020..

Don't know if it did with all of the Covid effects numerous industries?

3/ From the notes on the 4th ediiton

Microwave oven leakage

The 1st edition has a section on Microwave ovens (15.10). This states that microwave leakage (radiation) can occur if the oven is damaged or corroded but microwave leakage tests are normally only carried out after repair.

The 2nd edition gives some information on functional checks, but no mention of microwave leakage tests.

The 3rd edition recommends that “Microwave leakage should be checked at appropriate intervals”.

The 4th edition dropped the microwave section completely. The preface gives details that the microwave leakage testing is not within the remit of the CoP as it is not an electrical safety test and for this reason it has been removed.

SO...  

even if the micro wave is rusted and the door won't fully seal...

It doesn't present any electrical danger.....

You won't die from electric shock..

AND Electricians are not expected to measure microwave radiation!!

4/ IF the 5th edition did come out in Sept..

is it possible that tests have been done to two different editions?

4th & 5th...   Does this have any bearings on the different inspectors assessments?

Is the whole of your £700+ invoice relating to testing/PAT etc..

or is there some installation work where you have supplied materials?

As ALL materials remain your property until paid for..

If it is just PAT/Testing then at least you don't have to worry about paying wholesalers bills...

Let us know how you get on..

Guinness  

Geoff1946 said:

If you are going legal then I would just stick with them being OK when you tested them. End of story.  The fact that they were found defective some time later is in my opinion irrelevant.

No-one can dispute your results unless doing so at exactly the same time.

Click to expand...

 concurr, don't get involved in any discussions with the client prior to the court case and do not conceed anything like offering a discount. Keep all correspondence polite and professional. I've always found customers back down when they get the court letter and pay up!  

binky said:

 concurr, don't get involved in any discussions with the client prior to the court case and do not conceed anything like offering a discount. Keep all correspondence polite and professional. I've always found customers back down when they get the court letter and pay up!  

Click to expand...

Still have to pay the court fee though so I'd still recommend another last attempt to resolve prior to court.