Builder left house with fire and electrocution risk

[John Dragon]

Further, NICEIC are UKAS registered (which is the standard I would suggest specifiers would expect of an accreditation body) while the ECA appear not to be.  Examples of other UKAS registered accreditors are BM TRADA, National Britania, Underwriters Laboratories Inc, FM Approvals Limited, BSi, CORGI, BRE Certification Limited Incorporating LPCB & WIMLAS etc.

http://www.ukas.com/about_accreditation/accredited_bodies/certification_body_schedules.asp

ECA provide certification in partnership with BRE Certification Ltd

[Chris Houston]

You appear to be saying that NIC don't take fees from their members?

No, I think the record shows that I said nothing of the sort.

You also seem to be saying that NIC are an enforcement agency as opposed to a contractors association?

The words I used, and I chose them carefully, were that the NICEIC are an indepedent regulatory body and that the ECA are a trade association.

I think what I am saying is quite clear - that NICEIC are firstly an indepedent regulatory body and a a UKAS accredited approval body and that the ECA are firstly a trade association.  In my opinion, these are different and I'd prefer to specify an independant regulatory body.  

Do you think I have got this wrong?

[John Dragon]

I think that you are creating a negative air about a respectable body (ECA).

NIC   ARE   dependant on their members - who pays them (the NIC) if not their members?

[Chris Houston]

Well, bluntly, I am saying that in my personal opinion I would specify the NICEIC over the ECA.  In a free country I'm quite entitled to hold that opinion, however I'm also activly encouraging anyone who thinks I'm wrong to hold this view to tell me why.  Feel free to do so, or let me know if there are any inaccuracies in what I have said above.

[Ken Taylor]

Interesting discussion. I would say that every completion certificate that I have been given for contracted electrical works or periodic examination has borne the NICEIC logo - so they do seem to have general acceptance in that respect.

[John Dragon]

As an "independant regulatory body" what will NIC do to this contractor in question?

Assuming he is not an NIC member, what power do NIC as an "independant regulatory body" have over him? or can they only discipline their own members?

You are more than entitled to your opinion, the NIC do a good job (undisputed) but you seem to be confusing them with a non profit making governmental dept.

[Midland Retty]

Hi Louise

I feel the treatment you received from your Local Trading Standards Team was completely unacceptable.

I would contact them again and ask them why they weren't intrested first time round in your concerns, and that you are now gathering evidence from a qualified electrician to show that your family were put at risk by the builder.


If they still don't seem interested in your concerns then the next course of action would be to remind them of their obligations under the Local Authority Enforcement Concordat

(Most, if not all, council departments sign up to the concordat around the country, its a semi voluntary mechanism which dictates how a local authority will be open and transparant in its approach to enforcement, and when dealing with complaints from members of the public, amongst many other things.It's basically a code of conduct)

They may say they need further evidence to investigate complaint further - which is fine, but they have to tell you what to do to get that evidence, not simply leave you hanging wondering how to go about it.

If you still get no joy tell them you would like to make an official complaint about the way you have been dealt with and also write immediately to the Cheif Executive of the council.

Wouldn't hurt for them to know you may go to the press if the electricians report proves your family were put at risk!

Also as someone also mentioned go to your local counsellor. Get them involved, tell them the trouble you faced. If the builder is as bad as you suspect then you correctly stated he may go on to cause other risk in other premises, and something definately needs to be done about that.