Carryon Regardless

Per week is my guess.

Nice idea but if they decide to relocate there would be issue over who owns what proportion and what rights to it there would be. Perhaps that can be clarified in contract but sounds like being complicated with possible litigation ahead. Then if one part snuffs it it their estate would need to be clarified. Similar issue arises should they fail to continue paying, and how would you then evict a part owner?

I've just been chatting to Mrs Me, she says I look to deep, duty of care, demonstrating responsibility if challenged and all that. It seems you think like me Mel. Not paranoid 'cos the gits are out to get us. And the design of all this ever changing and increasing responsibility and confusion is that we shall fail in compliance.

I reserve the right to alter my stance on this if a reasonably qualified Sparky but not registered or recently updated to 18th Edition (plus inspection and testing) is prosecuted as a a tester. On the principle that we can never cite the authorities as incorrect, w/o spending a couple of £million Gina Miller style (and still w/o a likelihood of success.) Anyway a little ditty to add. I see I've to check my immersion heaters. If they don't have an automatic hi temp trip (98 degrees) as well as the stat control, and they have aplastic head tank, they are C2 and 'unsatisfactory'. Easy to spot as with immersion cover off, the stat block will have a reset button (or not). Only about 12 quids and 10 minute change out so not a biggy, aside from me having 10 to look at.

Most are aware of our continually increasing responsibilities to our poor, disadvantaged and bullied tenants, that we expect to live in the squaller we provide them, for extortionate and unjustified rents that we demand from them at gunpoint. A few years back I created 'Tenancy Packs'. The 2nd page detailed the contents, that included all the legislative required stuff and more. It would also include meter readings at start of occupancy. Both parties would sign and date. The record of required information given to T's was so created and I needed to just keep a copy of the one page, aside from AST's and of reports of course. The latest requirement is for us to provide 9 pages of EICR to each existing T within 28 days of the 1st April. A bit of ambiguity is that if the report details improvements required (not merely advised) then we have 28 days to address issues. So it follows the T should now get the 1st report and within 28 days of that the 2nd report, or record of issues now addressed. Silly or not it has a potential £30k fine (each property)for getting it wrong. Sorry I've waffled again. To the crux of my suggestion, and invitation to show me the error of my thinking. Choice 1. Each T provides us with an email address. We then attach copies of the required info. Proof is available of such as needed by printing out the email. Saves paper, saves postage, saves us the trouble of getting a signature. Some of my T will say they don't have internet access, is this my problem or theirs? Choice 2. Develop a website, sounds easy if said fast and at this point is beyond my capability. We use websites most days and they can have log in that allows access to an individuals account. That account can hold specifically relevant information. The home page can carry generic information. There are a few reasons for my re thinking. I charge £10 for any tenancy pack not returned at the end of a tenancy. This is because I can reuse much of the content and saves my time producing new. I haven't seen one returned as yet, and as we can't charge for sweet fa these days Shelter would enjoy making claim for my charges. Our compliance would be on record, digitally. But could a T still claim they didn't know if the information is available in such a format? In truth I don't favour having to put in additional efforts that are essentially wiping asses, but maybe this is the better way to address the ever increasing evils????

I've been in contact with 3 lots of sparky bods so far. Some are happy to detail new metal consumer units, fire rated downlighters and more. They are slow to explain that most often these upgrades are only a requirement in specific situations, so often not required at all. I spoke to a couple of sparky's who said I could do it myself, but I'm not registered says I, so a local authority would reject me as an inspector. Anyway it wasn't a lengthy discussion. It is true I am a little behind with my knowledge. I put myself through the 17th Edition Electrical Regs, but since then there have been amendments, the 3rd being most applicable. Later there was the 18th came about and there will be more. Sometimes there are even cancellations of newly introduced measures. It's a shame the engineers can't produce something that is good for the long term instead of continually adding confusion to the electrical regs. To the fact of it, for a 'person' to produce an EICR 'they must be qualified and competent. You would think that as this has such a great impact on our society, us specifically at the moment, the qualification would be specific. As is it leaves ambiguity for the lawyers to enjoy revenues in the event of an incident, where the Police involve the HSE, where the HSE pass it up the chain to the DPP, who would most likely let the courts decide on it. Reading forums there is confusion on many aspects of the EICR. For example some are stating they produce fault codes for lack of surge protection, wtf. More often it is recognised that it is very useful for creating work and revenues, and most Sparky's would prefer a nice earner sitting at a consumer unit for 2 hours or so rather than crawling under floors or scrambling through loft spaces. On the same lines replacing downlighters from under is a nice little job. Btw, upgrading those to fire rated is only required where penetration of a ceiling would affect the fire rated integrity of a fire rated dwelling above, in a HMO for instance. Replacing downlighters in a lounge where the staircase is an easy fire route anyway is pointless. I had a Sparky lined up following my pre inspections and relevant improvements. It could be argued that it isn't always essential but I wanted all circuits to have a form of RCB protection. That meant replacing 6 consumers. Sparky's rates were attractive, his availability, surprisingly, seemed no issue. I emailed to clarify his qualification's and the calibration dates of his meters. I could only get ambiguous response to those points. It led me to believe he is no more suitable than I am. Do we have liability if the Sparky we employ turns out to be deficient? In the event that's another one for the lawyers, at our expense I guess. Anyway I'm expecting 2 new meters in the morning, to compliment my existing meters. These are from RS Components and will be ROHS certified. Finding usable inspection sheets online was a challenge, but achieved. Tbh I think there is a lot of dross within them but I'll use that format even though my own produced inspection sheets are far more user friendly and carry the relevant info. I accept that I may be challenged at some point but believe my qualifications are adequate. My experience and therefor competence certainly is. All inspected there should be minimal risk of incident, after all that is the purpose of all this isn't it? We can't escape T's interfering with our properties but I view that the records of inspection would demonstrate that they have done so later.

There is lots of info out there. Much misleading, some inaccurate. I would be interested to see the info Nev M has as my understanding is different. I read the link below at speed so may well have missed something. But lower down where it details the penalty it is at £200 for not producing or providing an EPC to those entitled. An EPC is valid for 10 years, after that we are liable to have a new one produce d. I'm happy to be shown my error on this. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/671018/A_guide_to_energy_performance_certificates_for_the_marketing__sale_and_let_of_dwellings.pdf Mel I thought our requirement for the legionnaires fallacy was to carry out a risk assessment. I've done all mine informally, in other words in my head, on the basis that if challenged by a clip board carrying school leaver I can justify or simply request the smart pants points out the risk/s. I haven't heard of formal certificates, just sprung up from nowhere assessors offering a pointless service. Again, happy to be enlightened.

My last comment above was that lat piece of jigsaw that helped me realise why Shelter get so much support from the state, more often locally. They are the unofficial policing of us for the state.

I only know of one local council that actually has my properties registered. And that is just one property I have in Hydburn (Accrington) through their Selective Licencing scheme. Even the Welsh Rent smart don't record my properties. Hydburn do ask for my gas cert each 12 months, they haven't asked for my EPC, and I'm wondering if they will take interest in the EICR. It seems that the policing of the ever increasing initiatives, in the main, are still ahead sometime or down to an event that causes investigation. T's taking a complaint to Shelter would do it of course.

I thought Covid had caused such insurance to be of very limited purpose.

They providing a British and reachable G'tor seems less likely. That would be the let down for me. They could be earning a £Million, but if they relocate over seas it doesn't help you any.

In my case I make it clear, over 25's, no animals, retired or sick welcome intentionally unemployed not. As for g'tors while home owning is strongly desired I can't always hold out for such, but it doesn't take much noggin to realise the a are wasting all our time by suggesting another unemployed renter, if they have even considered I require a G'tor after being told. As I am remote from most of my properties the idea of the A is to save me pointless journeys by weeding out the dross, and finding a suitable applicant from their superior marketing set up. In Ashton this was achieved, and swiftly. In Accrington I went through 2 A's in over 12 months, they sent potential T's time and again that you would cross the street to avoid. Being a slow learner I eventually sorted it out myself. In Wales the T's I did accept from their presented dross didn't work out well. Now I post a board (that has done well) leave it a week or so, then advertise. I have close communication with another long term T that conducts initial viewings. As suggested by RL my aim has been to develop good working relationships, not only with A's but trades as well. The mutual advantage from trust and loyalty is well worth cultivating.

It might be of benefit to learn what both LL's and T's find most attractive about using A's. I used to hope that I could live remote and use the services of such as yourself to look after my properties in my absence. I became paranoid that they would drop me in the goo. But long term T's in my Ashton property wouldn't have found me, or wanted to, if it wasn't for the find only service provided. When they learned I would self manage they were unsure as they perceived they would enjoy a more professional service from an A. This we know is often not the case. I guess some T's would also be concerned at dealing with LL's that might be abusive when things aren't to their liking. Again a perception that A's would be more polite and responsive. My issues with A's, on the find only, was them ringing to discuss an ideal proposed T. But didn't know their age, if they had animals, if there was a G'tor (and suitable). They effectively expected me to trust them to install who ever, and considered me to be awkward for having the audacity to question their choice for my properties. In one location the A had their own properties. This meant they had 1st choice and I would get the undesirables sent to me. Some A's found it unpalatable to use 'my' contract, as they were not familiar. They didn't see that I would have the T on their contract that I was unfamiliar with. This isn't something I had experience of but have heard that the transparency in maintenance / repairs can be lacking. The cost often might be perceived as ott with A's enjoying what ever mark up. Then of course there are questions as to the validity of works carried out. To some "it's a rented property" sounds like "it's an insurance claim", it being a cash cow situation. In Wales I even had an A state they couldn't find me a T because proposed applicants couldn't understand that I didn't take a deposit. It was said with a straight face. That was the last dealing I had with them.

Longer than that I had a T that was organising loft and cavity wall insulation. As well as solar panel installations. I approved 2 houses for loft but nowt else, and told him not to have it laid as I would prepare the lofts and wrap the insulation to keep dust down. Being on commission he arranged cavity wall, I had to move fast to stop him / them drilling the flats when I heard as the flats already had it. He had the garage filled with more loft insulation than anyone would need. All at no cost but I was still sorry i trusted him. He absconded leaving his g'friend to resolve issues, then as my flats became mt they mysteriously had the electric accounts moved to some new organisation he had been pushing. To add insult I was later approached for a reference for him.

I suppose it follows that if a bad T register was desirable then a bad LL register would be also. While there are 'stated' efforts to improve LL qualification and the quality of their stock, and there is a record of LL prosecutions, we aren't subject to resentful T revenge as a register could become.

The same. His promotion of this was a surprise to me also. The conversation wasn't going to take up too much time as it has no value to me. But if we need interrogate everything we come across our progress screeches to a halt. And an issue might well be that it is beyond our means to understand where the flaws are. Speaking to another Welsh LL and she was already aware of online EPC's. It could be that this is widespread. Certainly on the EPC's I see no detrimental outcome. I haven't met a T that knows of EPC's let alone wants the information. Come to that I haven't heard of a LL that sees them as beneficial. My perception is we tick boxes to cover our butts often.

I personally have no issues with a North / South divide. London is the natural centre of the universe and so will create and receive the vast majority of intentional business. It follows that a migration of commerce from there will remain closer to it. I visit with some regularity and enjoy the tourism like all them forinors. The prices are somewhat eye watering and the traffic reminds me of the advantages of up 'ere. As far as central heating. I get the impression it is gas fired wet systems that are considered to be such. something at odds with trying to outlaw the use of gas systems soon enough. But these initiatives and ever changing policies are beyond my ability to understand, so I merely, but often reluctantly, must take them as presented. While looking in a different direction is seemingly the designed fashion.

Ah, but you're Southern. Up 'ere we're just past 'avin to go out t' lavvy in't night lad. The jo po steaming under bed was warming but a bit smelly. I reckon it's only us loosing the coalman that stopped Sunday bath night in front of fire. A black man was just last one in't bath.

Talking to EPC chap (previous thread), he states that any property that is in a habitable state that doesn't already have central heating can have this fitted free. No need for claimants as T's, no cost to LL. If anyone has such a property it might be of interest.

I suspect it will be low readings that are the issue. A test is performed to check if the insulation is still in good enough condition. Essentially this is looking for the breakdown of the pvc coating of the cables but will pick other causes of breakdown. It could be from corrosion in back boxes causing growth within. Spiders and such could do it. Some have found vermin have chewed cable and a dead rat might still be with its teeth embedded into a cable. Anyways the test is using 500volts as that emulates the peak voltage present on our 240v (RMS) installations. A simple multi meter does miss poor insulation where a 500v tester finds it. We are allowed a reading down to 1 Mohm, lower is a fail. Ideally it would be infinity so very high. All switches should be on and end devices removed. So light on, isolate, and remove the lamp (disconnecting such as fluorescents and LV transformers becomes a nuisance so some might well overlook such). A flat ,locally gave me 2 low readings so I strip ccts down (2 of 'em) to investigate and find 2 legs each have one wire low insulation. I'm going to run trunking to replace both legs, but no need for a rewire the whole. It took me more than a day to test that flat. Yesterday I tested a more complicated house in 2 1/2 hours as it was clear, aside from the T's and all the clutter.

I feel your pain. An issue I perceive is that the contractor is keen to say you need, rather than I recommend. I asked my contractor specifically about the requirement for metal consumer units. "They are needed if they could impede the exit, by fire, of the only exit route." Stairs were mentioned. But it gets a C (advisory). The consumer is a chushy unit to replace and looks like a significant improvement. Easier money than crawling under floors anyway. I've several downlighters that 'neeeed' replacing, but I'll read up on that tomorrow. C's can wait.

This might be viewed as just one interpretation. Of the question of plastic boards, their advice recommends that a C3 - IMPROVEMENT RECOMMENDED code is given for a plastic board, only when it is either under wooden stairs or else in the sole means of escape from the property.A C3 code is akin to an 'advisory' on a car MOT. It does not constitute a fail, rather a situation where safety could be improved by having the following items rectified.Any other areas where a plastic fuse board may be located as opposed to a metal consumer unit, would not even be considered a C3 code, rather just something to note on the EICR. To me this sounds reasonable. And 'we' may prefer to take the advisory in our stride, to be actioned later. For me that action would be for 'me' to replace the consumer prior to the next inspection in 5 years. Further reading suggests that a plastic consumer below wooden stairs wouldn't get a C (advisory) if the area around the consumer is protected by plasterboard. There wasn't a suggestion that this should be double boarded to 1 hour, and since a finished and decorated area isn't for the sparky to know I would suggest 1 sheet is good. What it does do is suggest that we might provide other means to protect any egress route against a potential fire from the consumer. I'm open to suggestions as to what non flammable material we might use to box in the consumer. i have 2 next to the front door, the only escape door.

I'm sure I'm not the only one experiencing this. Covid is causing more to stay home, kids as well as adults. One family in particular, 3 boys off school, mummy and daddy have set up office in the kitchen. A call to tell me the door handles were broken, not all. I could claim it is abuse but good, long term T's I replaced all. But working in the house is a flippin' nightmare. It's no wonder stuff gets broken with the clutter and constant in / out. A large desk in what was a spacious kitchen needs to be navigated round and it's the main thoroughfare of the house. There always seems to be a kid (young adult) in the way or needing to get past. Today I did an electrical pre inspection there, full check it's just that I can't certify it. The lady had an online meeting at 1pm so all quiet, and needs circuits reinstating for the PC , screen and router. My visit was pre arranged last week btw, and for today as it is the 1st day the kids are back at school. I've had issue gaining access to 2 houses in Wales, as they're concerned about covid. They are ignoring me since I wrote to inform of the electrical works/inspection and the EPC. I'll just have to raise the threat level some there. With the increasing likelihood of our properties becoming work from home offices is anyone giving consideration to the increased wear and tear?

Landlord references. Their T is a nuisance and they are happy for them to leave. Why would they want to put you off taking them? You are highly un likely to gain possession of relevant tenancy history anyway. Sung for compensation would just be another gamble. A good T may not get a reference so that could be a deterant and the happy LL keeps that T. Financial checks on the G'tor are more valuable,

Last eve I was looking at through my epc's online. Recommendations for under(solid)floor insulation, est cost £1,500 - £2,000. Saving £47p.a. You might think that's silly till I tell you of another that recommends a wind generator est cost £4,000 - £6,000 to save £9 p.a. That on a 2 bed terraced house where the thing couldn't realistically be sighted any where and if the rear drive had one I envisage the neighbours would dismantle it so they can sleep at night. That one was scored low for sandstone outer skin, is that worse than clay brick? But it recovered some for the (assumed) cavity wall insulation it doesn't have. 3 top floor flats are rated at D. 2x 2 ground floor are rated at E because they don't have loft insulation in the loft they don't have, while being far better protected from the elements. To gain a couple of extra points score we should install low energy lamps (bulbs if you prefer)to save the T money. Aside from them giving them to mum I feel they should be responsible for saving their own money. The whole isn't deserving of respect. But at least we aren't threatened with a £30k disproportionate fine like the electric inspection. BTW has anyone spotted that we can be inspected (electrical) by the 1st April and if the inspection details problems we have 14 days to address issues. I feel it to be a rather tall expectation to find a contractor to carry out extensive works and get reinspected in a 2 week period. The only way to avoid the potential of the fine would be to relocate T's in a hotel. This is Scotland. They are unable to create 'new' tenancies in a property with epc rating of E (or worse) from 1 April 2022, it must be D or better. By 2025 existing tenancies will be illegal with E rating. Are we following suite? I've limited time but can't see anything that relates to us.