They want us to support their campaign to increase regulation for landlords by requiring a mandatory 5 year check of electrical installation.
I'm uneasy. Of course we are supportive of any approach that improves electrical safety in rental property. But I'm unsure of lending support to their campaign. Why? For a number of reasons:
1. They say 16% of those living in private rented homes have experienced problems with electrical hazards. What is meant by "experienced problems with electrical hazards". Seems to me that this is a pretty non-discript term...please tell me more.
2. They say landlords should be saddled with the responsibility and cost of a 5 yearly check. Why not homeowners or public sector landlords too. Seems to me a tad unfair and discriminatory.
3. A charity seeking a CAUSE. Call me an old cynic but is this all about a charity desperate to justify their existence and dare I say it raise more funds for themselves preserving jobs and salaries for their employees.
4. To have RCDs in all rental properties. That would be fine if the same was required in all properties regardless of tenure. Otherwise why single out one form of tenure over another...unfair!
Find below the email from the charity and please feel free to post your views by posting your comments.
Electrical Safety Email from Electrical Safety First
Hi there, I hope all is well at Property Hawk? Private rented accommodation now houses more than 9 million people and 1.3 million families in England. Electrical Safety First and Shelter have released a joint report examining the current electrical conditions in the Private Rented Sector (PRS). The report found that 16% of those living in private rented homes have experienced problems with electrical hazards in the last year alone. Shockingly, there is currently no legal requirement for landlords to ensure that electrics are safe before renting out a property or to regularly check the wiring and any electrical appliances they have provided. We are approaching safety conscious websites and blogs willing to help raise the profile of this issue and drum up support for the report’s recommendations below: 1. Mandatory 5 yearly checks of electrical installations and electrical appliances supplied with private rented sector properties by a competent person. 2. All properties that are rented privately to have Residual Current Device (RCD) protection. 3. An end to the practice of retaliatory eviction by landlords, giving renters the confidence to report poor electrical safety. 4. More freedom and support for local authorities to take tough enforcement action against landlords that wilfully flout their responsibilities. You can view the full report here. Let me know if this is a cause you would be willing to cover on your website.
Regards, Ted
Safety Liaison Executive
Electrical Safety First
www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk
Registered Charity No. 257376
Landlord insurance - professional rates - online quotes
Charity? The Electrical Safety Council is, in reality, a publicly funded quango. It is a branch of government bureaucracy busy spending tax payers' cash lobbying the very same govenment for more regulation. We won't have heard the last of this campaign, their website boasts that they are softening us up by working on the more amenable Scottish Government and Welsh Assembley first.
ReplyDeleteI am a retired electrical engineer, starting with house bashing in my youth and retiring as a design consultant for a corporate company. The current IET Regulations for electrical safety in domestic dwelling is that the installation is to be retested every 10 years, but we all know in reality, that it is never done. I have recently been in houses where the wiring is still in rubber! When a house comes on the market, the surveyor looks at the fittings and instantly puts the house down for a rewire throughout, before a mortgage is considered.
ReplyDeleteSome tenants cause damage to the electrical installation, sockets get kicked, switched are cheap and nasty, and soon fall apart, so in one way, I can see the need for landlords to have the place retested, but that leaves the home owner with a dodgy installation that remains for years. If we are to have a level playing field, then all properties should be periodically tested, as part of the insurance criteria. To single out landlords is wrong and must be addressed.
Another wrong is the Part P regulations for electrical installations in domestic buildings, brought in by the previous government as a means of aiding the ailing electrical industry. However, nobody saw the inclusion of kitchen fitters, plumber and double glazing salesmen, who took a simple course and gained a qualification that even I don't possess. As it stands, a double glazing fitter with a 2 day appreciation course, can retest a property and issue a certificate, but a time served electrical engineer with 50 years in the industry, and fully qualified to degree level, cannot. That needs addressing also.
Thanks for your expert comments and it raises many interesting technical issues. I think one point I have made and you also mention is that landlords seem always to get singled out for special treatment. This inequity is to my mind at the heart of my unease.
ReplyDeleteInequitable is one word and the other is unnecessary. A well wired house that is not abused will last 50+ years using materials from the age of PVC onwards. This will not help protect people from the few rogue landlords but will penalise the many good ones. Also, the cost of this will simply end up being passed on to tenants which is counter to the government's quest to reduce rents!
ReplyDeleteReject roundly.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking as both a landlord and qualified electrician I would support sensible measures backed up by regulation to improve electrical safety for occupiers, but as many people have noted, this should apply equally to all tenure types.
I recently had an incident where the owner-occupier next door was causing my tenants to receive electric shocks because of their failure to maintain their installation which had probably not been touched by anyone qualified for 20+ years.
I do think that it should be a legal requirement that all occupiers should have both gas + electrical inspections with the frequency based on the current regulations.
The current electrical regulations have a sensible risk-based approach with an initial recommendation which the person doing the testing can increase or reduce based on the condition of the installation and what problems occur. For normal domestic installations this is 10 years, and I fail to see how a blanket application of testing every 5 years is justified. In terms of risk/cost/benefit it would be much better to test every 10 years but require the mandatory installation of RCDs to all existing installs.
My estate agent who manages my flats insists that a check is done every time a new tenant enters the property. He is a solicitor and stated its a lot cheaper to do it than pay out on a teanant death for faulty wiring. at £80 I have to agree.
ReplyDelete