Informing Local Authority of EICR?

I would suggest it only applies when they asked for the EICR in the first place. But that's me taking the common sense approach.

I suggest that you look at the regulations, the explanatory memorandum and the guide for landlords, all of which are available on the government website.

If you obtain an eicr with codes c1 c2 or fi you are required to get the work completed within 28 days and send a copy of the report with confirmation that all the required work has been completed and that the safety standards are now met within 28 days of completion. This applies regardless of whether the local authority have requested a copy.

The problem being that when you do send evidence of remedial works to the LA they ask why you have sent it when they haven't asked for a copy in the first place.

Reply to the comment left by Gary Nock at 02/02/2021 - 07:13
In that event they need to be referred to the regulations. It is not open to them to decide whether or not the landlord should send them a copy of the report.

My understanding is the unsatisfactory EICR would be reported to your LA Building Control and that is why you then have to notify them in writing with evidence that any remedial works have been carried out within the 28 days. Also for completeness and to avoid issues in the futures it's good practice to provide the evidence of compliance to the LA and keep a copy of that communication to which you are unlikely to receive a reply!

"I suggest that you look at the regulations, the explanatory memorandum and the guide for landlords,"

I think my initial post makes it clear I've been there, and a few other information sources such as electrical trade bodies etc. There is much opinion and interpretation out there.

My LA switchboard suggested I contact Building Control. I asked them "out of curiosity" why they wanted the minor works certificate (for the remedials) and what did they would do with it. The first person didn't know, referred it up the ladder, and I got a call from the chief of Building Control the next day. It was news to him too, and he has forwarded it to Housing Services. I may give them a call later, after a respectable time for them to look up the regs and see what they're supposed to be doing.

Reply to the comment left by Gunga Din at 03/02/2021 - 10:52
As far as I can see, there is nothing in the Regulations to say why they want it or what they should do with it, but "ours not to reason why". Presumably somebody somewhere in the recesses of MCHLG knows the answer, which could simply be that the requirement was included as an additional incentive for landlords to get the work done under threat of financial penalties for non-compliance.

Have you considered the possibility that in the light of:

"1 (3) These Regulations apply in England only to—
(b) all existing specified tenancies from 1st April 2021."

no part of the Regulations, including provision of details of any report obtained or work done prior to 1st April 2021, applies to tenancies in existence prior to 1st June 2020?

I would not want to test this but it could provide a line of defence if the need arose.

Thanks for the comment SL - it forces my non-legally trained mind into more mental gymnastics! To me your para. beginning "1(3) These..." and the next para. are contradictory, surely all tenancies regardless of when they started, have to be in compliance from April 1st?

The following is a more comprehensive Q & A (linked through the Landlords Guide).

http://www.electricalsafetyroundtable.co.uk/downloads/Electrical-Safety-Standards-in-the-Private-Rented-Sector-Regulation-ESR-Guidance.pdf

It adds the stipulation that when the notice of remedial works is sent to the LA, it must be accompanied by the original unsatisfactory EICR, which isn't stated in the legislation.

I'm taking the view that although I'm more than happy to get all my flats inspected and corrected, I might as well comply with the reporting rules to the letter.

I've had four C2 fails due to the cable holes in the top side of the consumer unit being big enough to allow foreign objects to drop in. Fair enough, but this will probably catch the majority of plastic CUs in the land. One was remedied with a plastic template glued to the top, notches cut out for the cables, all sealed by intumescent sealer (the latter helpfully suggested by the inspector). The other three CUs were ancient anyway, the type where pull-out CBs go into the original fuse slots, and I had these CUs replaced anyway.

Interesting that the legislation and the Guide for LLs doesn't actually use the phrase EICR, and just talks vaguely about "the report". I'm having a "discussion" with a contractor about whether an EIC (installation certificate for major works) will suffice. I don't think it does, based on research.

Next query - do the common areas in a three story terrace with three flats need a separate EICR (emergency lighting, stairwell lighting and smoke alarm system). Logically it should but I find no reference specifically, and could argue that its not a residential area covered by a tenancy. I'll get them done anyway though.

Reply to the comment left by Seething Landlord at 03/02/2021 - 12:02
Regarding your first paragraph, the fact that properties cannot be let without a satisfactory EICR which must be forwarded to the LA would presumably also serve to bring to the notice of the local council any properties on their patch which they were unaware were being let. Some LAs seem to be always on the lookout for possible opportunities for more lucrative fees or fines.
Your second paragraph illustrates yet another badly-drafted piece of landlord legislation open to more than one interpretation. Of course the legal profession must be given a chance to rake in a bob or two!

Yes GD you are right, all tenancies must comply from 1st April 2021 and it specifically says that the first inspection and testing must be carried out by that date. The Regulations therefore purport to impose duties to be performed in relation to existing tenancies before the Regulations apply to them. I think it is pretty clear what they were intended to say, but they were published by the Minister without any proper scrutiny and in my view are full of uncertainty.
From the outset people have been relying on guidance issued by the trade associations and individual electricians who by and large have assumed and repeated ad nauseam that the Regulations mean what they believe was the intention, some of them having been involved in the drafting process. There are conflicts between the Regulations, the Explanatory Memorandum, the Guidance notes and the press releases, all issued by Government. It is a real muddle but in the final analysis only a Court can decide the true meaning of the various clauses and I will be surprised if a case ever gets that far. In the meantime I agree with you that the sensible approach is to comply with the spirit of the Regulations.
It reminds me of the fiasco surrounding deposit protection which had to be resolved by further legislation after the Superstrike case, and that all hinged on the proper interpretation of one clause in the Housing Act which most people thought they understood until the Court determined the correct meaning.
Re your comment "It adds the stipulation that when the notice of remedial works is sent to the LA, it must be accompanied by the original unsatisfactory EICR, which isn't stated in the legislation." - the requirement is in fact at para 3 (5) (c) of the Regulations (read the whole of 3 for context):
"(c) supply that written confirmation, together with a copy of the report under sub-paragraph (3)(a) which required the further investigative or remedial work to the local housing authority within 28 days of completion of the further investigative or remedial work."
As far as the term EICR is concerned I suspect that it might be the only form of report approved in the Wiring Regulations and to get to the true meaning of "the report" you might find it helpful to look at the definitions of "qualified persons" and "electrical safety standards" in clause 2 of the Regulations. Whatever, it is the recognised industry standard for reporting.
Your final query was raised by me fairly recently - see https://www.property118.com/eicrs-communal-areas/
where I outlined an argument suggesting that an EICR for the common parts might be required. Nobody seemed to want to engage with the detail and the discussion petered out soon after it started. Make of it what you will, but I came to the same conclusion as you - best to be on the safe side. Ah, having just looked at it again I see that you have already added a comment on that thread - I'm afraid that I have no further thoughts on the matter but am more than happy to listen and respond to argument based on any points regarding the legal interpretation, particularly any flaws in my reasoning.