UK Landlord Forum / Life

What are the legal requirements concerning the electrics of a property???

I have read a fair bit about this but just wanted to check with you guys.

Now some say you don't need to do anything as a landlord.
Others -
5 yearly inspection of the electrics
An inspection should be carried out at the start of each tenancy?

I take it this means a "Electrical Installation Condition Report"

Thanks

You must be satisfied the electrics are safe. There is no requirement for any kind of professional inspection or any certificate.

That's what I thought.
But my tenant who is being a pain in the bum anyway is an electrician.

well he was ex army and retrained as an electrician.
But is quoting all sorts of shit at me.

Doesn't change anything regarding need for a certificate etc..

Quote what he is saying here.

You have to be confident that the property is safe.  If he is asking how do you know the property is safe, I think that is a fair question. 

I lived in this particular property for 12 years and have never had any problem with any part of the electrics in this house so i am confident they are fine.
he has quoted to me in a little rant that he had a few months ago -

guidance no 3 17th edition wiring regs state a full periodic inspection in a domestic dwelling must be carried out every 5 years or change of tenancy

he also said that he was some kind of inspector and that i had 4 code ones.. whatever they are??

Any ideas?

Quote from: paulaa on March 01, 2016, 11:46:31 AM
I lived in this particular property for 12 years and have never had any problem with any part of the electrics in this house so i am confident they are fine.
he has quoted to me in a little rant that he had a few months ago -

guidance no 3 17th edition wiring regs state a full periodic inspection in a domestic dwelling must be carried out every 5 years or change of tenancy

he also said that he was some kind of inspector and that i had 4 code ones.. whatever they are??

Any ideas?

First of all - you are not required by law to have a periodic inspection.  However you are liable if anyone is injured or dies because you let a property with faulty electrics.  The usual advisary period for inspection is 5 years - but it is advisary.

Just because you "never had any problem in 12 years" does not mean that you dont have electrical faults.  Is everything earthed properly, do your light switches have multiple live feeds to them, are your circuit breakers the correct values - in fact when was the last time you checked your RCCDs using the manual test switch.

This is about caring enough to give you peace of  mind that your electrics are safe.  I can't think why you wouldnt have got an inspection done before letting.  Some people even suggest getting an inspection done after every single letting, because you dont know for sure whether the previous tenant has been dabbling with the electrics.

For me this is a no-brainer.

If it mattered then there would already be regulations in place to cover this. The fact that there aren't - yet - clearly implies this is not a big deal. For me, Landlords doing work that is not required is a no-brainer - as in, the Landlord who has been hoodwinked into that course of action has no brain.

I repeat - if it mattered then there would be a law in place. A law is not in place therefore it does not matter and a visual check is enough. All you need to do is to take a common sense approach. It all may be different in HMOs, but in normal residential properties there is absolutely no requirement for this.

OP - have a read of this and try to stop your Tenant running rings around you.

http://www.elecsa.co.uk/Documents/Public-Documents/Bldg-and-Property-Mngt/Landlords-Guide-to-Electrical-Safety-May-2011_01.aspx

I quote - "The frequency of periodic inspection and testing will depend upon the type of installation, its use and operation, the frequency and quality of maintenance and the condition of the electrical installation at the time of the inspection and test. Although IEE Guidance Note 3 Inspection and Testing recommends 10 years as the maximum period between tests, this relates to the period from the initial inspection (when the installation was first installed) to the first periodic inspection and test. Subsequent inspections may result in a recommendation for the interval between future inspections to be increased or decreased depending upon the condition of the installation, although an increase in the interval is very unlikely. The inspector recommending the interval between subsequent inspection and tests must apply engineering judgment and consider the overall condition of the installation at the time of the inspection and test. IEE Guidance Note 3 also recommends that for domestic dwellings a periodic inspection is carried out on change of occupancy. For rented accommodation the ESC recommends that periodic inspection and testing is carried out at least every 5 years or on the change of tenancy. Housing organisations that keep an up-to-date record of the condition of their housing stock and work to a written maintenance programme and periodic testing regime may be in position to justify a longer period between periodic inspection and tests."

To meet the actual requirements a Landlord will need to regularly carry out basic safety checks to ensure that the electrical installation and appliances are safe and working. Also have a look here:

https://easyproperty.com/what-are-my-obligations-as-a-landlord/#ElectricalSafety

QuoteElectrical Safety

Your legally required electrical safety obligations are to make sure:

All electrical installations (e.g. sockets and light fittings) are safe when tenants move in and maintained in a safe condition throughout the duration of the tenancy
All appliances you supply, e.g. cookers and kettles, are safe and have (at a minimum) the CE marking
A periodic inspection and test is carried out by a registered electrician every five years (only legally required if your property is an HMO i.e. House in Multiple Occupation)

And .gov.uk...

https://www.gov.uk/private-renting/your-landlords-safety-responsibilities

QuoteElectrical safety
Your landlord must make sure:

the electrical system is safe, eg sockets and light fittings
all appliances they supply are safe, eg cookers and kettles

And even Shelter... note the only use of the word "must":

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/repairs_and_bad_conditions/health_and_safety/electrical_safety_responsibilities

"If you live in a shared house your landlord must have an inspection carried out every five years."

So, the objective for you today is to put your Tenant back in his box. However, I would be very keen (as the Landlord) to know what the asserted "4 code ones" might be... they may require some attention... or, even if they don't, you might decide to do something anyway.

Sounds like your Tenant has been reading his textbook with great enthusiasm... but wrongly. I would relish telling him that... suggest you do... "you've misread your textbook old friend".

http://www.tester.co.uk/iee-guidance-note-3-bs7671?gclid=CKGPwtXDn8sCFekp0wodGBACGQ

Quote from: Hippogriff on March 01, 2016, 12:53:55 PM
If it mattered then there would already be regulations in place to cover this. The fact that there aren't - yet - clearly implies this is not a big deal.

I have already said there is no legal requirement. That does not mean that it is not a reasonable thing to do to check your electrics are up to scratch. At the very least this provides peace of mind.  To extend your point, would suggest that it is fine to let out a death trap because it is just not a big deal.  If it was, there would be a law, right ?  By the way my brain is there, I have seen a scan ;-)

It is reasonable to check your electrics are up to scratch by doing a visual inspection yourself, indeed. As that's all that is required, by law, anything else is patently unreasonable. QED.

Thank you so much Hippogriff again i am so grateful for your time and effort you put into these replies.
Ill be reading all day again now. Thanks for the links.

I have also did a bit of digging about these code ones. Its not very specific as to what they are on but it does say
"Danger present. Risk of injury. Immediate remedial action required"

But obviously the tenant hasnt given any more information than that.
Probably a scare tactic on his part.
I will get someone into look at them when I finally get him to leave.

Martha thanks for your input I get where your coming from on that one.

But even if you did do a massive electrics check and something still went wrong then you are still liable.
if you don't do anything and something goes wrong you are still liable..

Correct. But - careful - no-one is saying don't do anything.

You can walk around your property, check the switches, check the sockets, check the Consumer Board. You can easily see if there are bare wires, frayed cables or things hanging off walls that quite obviously shouldn't be. That is all doing something... but it is a something you don't have to pay for and you don't get a certificate for. What have you done by doing that? You have ensured the electrics are safe.

Quote from: paulaa on March 02, 2016, 11:13:41 AMBut obviously the tenant hasnt given any more information than that.
Probably a scare tactic on his part.

I suspect the same.

If the Tenant really wanted things fixed for safety they would not be coy about what they were. There is no need to act that way.

yes I agree I think if it was something risky then he would of specified.
But saying that he is proving to be a difficult tenant and is still late paying and not being very proactive with letting me know with what is going on.

Perhaps the tennant's angle on this is that they want some work out of it.

As far as what the legal requirements are, I dont think they help anyone. Whilst it is possible to spot some visible faults by viusal inspection,   I dont think you can tell if something is safe or not just by looking.  In particular, regarding any "plug in" appliances which are provided with the property, if landlords really wanted to check these were safe they would be doing continuity/mega tests on them at least.  But the law is a bit vaugue on how you would tell if something is going to be safe at start of tennancy (not to mention all the way through).  I accept that one could evidence that a basic check had been done - which might well exonerate a landlord from blame.  That does not imho, mean that the property is not dangerous.  It all depends whether you want to satisfy the wording of the law, or make your property safe for your tenant.  Take your pick.

Crikey. Let's try and be clear...

The law defines what you need to do to ensure that a gas installation is safe for your Tenants - you need to employ a professional Gas Safe person to test your system and sign it off with a GSC.
The law defines what you need to do to ensure that an electric installation is safe for your Tenants - you need to perform a basic check on the switches, sockets, Consumer Board etc..

If you have done both of these then, by definition, by law, you must have concluded they are safe. Saying that you've done what is required, but you cannot still be sure of safety is plainly daft. There is no point - none at all - with a person understanding what the law requires a Landlord to do but then casting doubt on its usefulness - down that road lies the path of Landlords paying for everything that ever needs doing - including the changing of a light bulb, the repair of a fence, the redoing of sealant around a shower tray, the fitting of a new door lock... we've seen it start with the Legionella stuff... it's a slippery road.

'tis madness! 

Be wary of advice from a forum
Always do your own research

I think there is a misunderstanding as to what is Law.
It is correct to say that there is no statutory law that sets out the requirement to inspect the fixed electrical installation in your property as in the Gas Safety Installation and Use Regulations.

However the  "Law" is made up of various sources one of which is the Law of Tort...you may well have heard of negligence and Duty of Care.

For the courts to determine there is a Duty of Care there are usually three tests
1. Sufficient Proximity 2. Forseeability 3. Fair just and reasonable to hold the Landlord liable
Almost certainly a Landlord will have a Duty of Care to an electrocuted tenant, likely will be found to have breached also the Landlord and Tenant Act see below.

Next you have to determine breach of that Duty of Care and given that there is considerable guidance available that fixed electrical installations should be regularly inspected there is a very very good chance that the landlord (especially an experienced landlord who may well be held to a higher standard that the reasonable man) will be found to have breached that duty of care

Basically, you will be in court answering a civil claim for negligence.
At the outer limits if someone died theoretically a manslaughter charge could also be bought forward but you would need to be grossly negligent (e.g. You ignored a warning from an electrician -- ahem)

Yes correct there is no specified periodicity for testing and getting a certificate but you cannot argue that "there is no law" and so a simple visual check by the landlord will be sufficient in all cases.

As an aside there are periodic check requirements in Scotland through statute.

In England

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 states that a Landlord is responsible …. “to keep in repair and proper working order the installations in the dwelling house for the supply of water, gas and electricity….”

BS7671:2008 as amended is the UK Standard for electrical installations and recommends  that all electrical installations be periodically inspected and in the case of Rented Dwellings be inspected upon change of occupier.
Electricity Safety Council recommends 5 years
17th ed Wiring Regs say 10 years from install, then up to the electrician but always on change of tenant

Other electrical related statute law include:
The Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994 require that equipment be safe
The Plugs and Sockets etc. (Safety) Regulations 1997 require standards to adhered to


To answer OP
a cat 1 issue is one that requires immediate/urgent attention.  If your tenant really has identified these then ask him (friendly) what he thinks are the issues.  To have 4 cat 1 issues ....well I'd be surprised but now that he has told you if you don't act you face (i) almost certain exposure to negligence claim if he gets zapped (ii) he can complain to the council who then serve you a notice and you then can't serve a s21

Your statement about liability is incorrect.  You need to do what a reasonable person would do.  Failure to do that opens you up to liability. If you do that you are unlikely to be held liable.

I'm not saying you should go get an electrician and on balance of probabilities a visual check is likely to be sufficient in most cases though maybe not the one faced by the OP but I am saying the law is broader than that which can be found in statute and the visual checks are unlikely to absolve you of negligence if the worst should happen.

Best of luck

Quote from: theangrylandlord on March 05, 2016, 04:09:31 PM
...... the visual checks are unlikely to absolve you of negligence if the worst should happen.

I agree. This is precisely what I was trying to get at. 

Quote from: theangrylandlord on March 05, 2016, 04:09:31 PMYou need to do what a reasonable person would do.  Failure to do that opens you up to liability. If you do that you are unlikely to be held liable.

Interesting... but ultimately confusing. All that technical information and reference to law that concludes with saying you must do what a reasonable person would do. I can't figure if that's an attempt at humour, but I don't think it is so I'd like to take the time to just, politely, hammer home what I said.

As we all know, it is impossible to define "reasonable" objectively. It is just the same as giving a Landlord a reasonable time to effect repairs. That reasonable time is entirely 100% absolutely (sic) subjective. If you think you can objectively define "reasonable" in this case I invite you to tell us all how. You will not be able to. Your advice, in this case, has (I think) merely muddied the waters with further somewhat incoherent nods to the idea of professionally paid for inspections being required, which 100% are not required... my reason for saying that? It's the law.

All of the other things you quoted simply aren't law and no Landlord will be expected to be even aware of them. Those are documents and regulations and, importantly, recommendations for Electricians.

I believe you have also misread the 17th Edition... it absolutely does not say always on change of Tenant at all (it is caveated). And, besides, it is not law (you've identified it's a recommendation, which is key)... I also paid soecial attention to your closing paragraph.

To the OP, a basic check, carried out by the Landlord, at no cost, is enough to meet your obligations. If you identify anything during that check that concerns you, get a professional in. If your Tenant complains about something not working as it should, get a professional in. You do not need to flutter a certificate in their face to meet your obligations. Compare this with gas, where your obligations are clear and legally defined. That is your answer.

It's not impossible to define "reasonable" the courts do it all the time.
It is commonly held to be the "man on the clapham omnibus".
Google that phrase and you will see.

Anyway I respect your opinion.

Moving on....

I cannot see how a Landlord doing what is required of them could ever be not perceived as reasonable. Going above-and-beyond what is required of you is something else... agreeable?

The gent in the hansome cab, going to the theatre?

Reasonable is like pain. Pain is indefinable, objectively. Doctors often ask you what the pain is like on a scale of 0 to 10... interesting question. Apparently 10 is the worst pain you can imagine... when I did my foot in last last year I went to the hospital, they asked me the question, I replied - "it's pretty damn bad, like a 9 - but it's not the worst pain I've experienced even... never mind the worst pain I can imagine!?!?!" - what does that even mean, can you imagine a pain?

Rambo might've said it was a 3. That seemingly doesn't diminish my 9 rating. Because it's all mine.

Once again - for the OP - a full periodic inspection, by a professional who provides you with a certificate, is not required. No inspection of that kind is ever required. It might be recommended. It might be strongly recommended. Guidance can state what it wants... but that's just... guidance. One day things might change... I will not mind at all, I like clarity.

Thanks everyone for your comments and the healthy debate that has been going on. All very interesting to read the different views and peoples experiences.