Condition reports


Postby kuzz » Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:27 pm

Can one just take there best guess at a reference method on a condition report, assume worst case senario or leave it blank? After all one is signing to say cables within the fabric of the building have not been inspected.
kuzz
Posts: 134
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 3:37 pm

Sponsor

Simply Build It

Postby ericmark » Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:54 pm

My son had problems with the firm he was working for with details on PIR forms as it was then. The main problem is once entered on a form people in the future don't question the information and will act on the guess you have entered.

With the PIR there was a unable to inspect code but with the EICR this option was removed it was said to make it more understandable by laymen.

I have made a comment in notes that EIR was not available and installation methods are assumed and should be checked before adding to the system. My thoughts were I was putting the onus to the client to produce the paperwork before starting.

Some clients seem to think if they don't show you the EIR then you can't cheat and just copy down the results. Like the guy who sends his car into service and puts paint on the grease nipples to see it you greased them. I remember one garage included on bill replacing all grease nipples but I fail to see how we can do anything like that.

If you said due to lack of EIR you had to lift floor boards likely client would just not pay. So only way is really to add a note to the effect that cable routes not confirmed.
ericmark
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:49 pm
Location: Mold, North Wales.


Postby kbrownie » Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:38 pm

[quote="kuzz"]Can one just take there best guess at a reference method on a condition report, assume worst case senario or leave it blank? After all one is signing to say cables within the fabric of the building have not been inspected.[/quote]
You don't guess anything! Refer to Section D extent and Limitations and document your findings.
Section D, should identify fully the extent of the installation covered and any limitations.
This should be agreed with the client.
kbrownie
Posts: 1757
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:36 pm


Postby kuzz » Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:15 pm

As i thought, and as i have been doing. Unfortunately I have an idiot boss who is trying to withhold payment for "incomplete test certs" Thanks.
kuzz
Posts: 134
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 3:37 pm


Postby kbrownie » Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:17 am

If your boss is holding back payment because their understanding is that your report is incomplete, due to the fact you have not documented reference methods for cables that cannot be visually inspected along all the route and providing the information given in "Section D" states this, then as you quite rightly conclude "your boss=idiot!"
kbrownie
Posts: 1757
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:36 pm


Postby kuzz » Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:56 pm

I've had to agree to assume the reference methods always going on the side of caution ie max insulation. Not that happy about it.can anyone point me in the direction of any niceic material on this subject?
kuzz
Posts: 134
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 3:37 pm


Postby kbrownie » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:12 pm

Why niceic ?
I would suggest ESC stuff
http://www.esc.org.uk/industry/industry ... nspection/
kbrownie
Posts: 1757
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:36 pm


Postby kuzz » Tue Jan 29, 2013 3:09 pm

It's niceic certs I'm filling in.
kuzz
Posts: 134
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 3:37 pm


Postby kbrownie » Tue Jan 29, 2013 7:57 pm

Are they any different than the model forms? I am not niceic, so don't know what if any different theire forms are. Do they insist you use there forms? I do my own design of form and my scheme provider are happy with that.
kbrownie
Posts: 1757
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:36 pm


Display posts from previous
Sort by
Order by