Online assistance for electrical trade people Login  |  Register  |   Forgot Password
Assistance for electrical trade people




Click here to send Ron a pdf document for publication on this Topic

Documents must be less than 200k in pdf format

Posted By Topic: Progress COC

Jan 02 2018 13:07

Consider job in two parts: cable installation, then after linings go on, fit off.

Am I obliged to issue a seperate COC for the cable installation if the fit off will be completed more than 20 days later?

I guess, can you argue that "the work" is the entire job or is the job comprised of many pieces of work which are each completed independently?

Jan 02 2018 15:23

Look at like this, can you preform the prescribed tests? Will it be in a safe condition? without fitting off it makes it impossible to test polarity of sockets.

I would only issue one COC at the completion of the job.

I have in the past issued more than 1 COC for a job, usually a large industrial project where the mains and switchboard are new, it's inspected and livened and the 2nd COC on completion of the rest of the installation.

Jan 02 2018 18:18

Thanks gregmcc. I understand what you're saying but if you haven't installed any sockets then you aren't required to test them.

Testing for installation of a cable segment might be limited to visual. Afterall that's the bit you can't do once the linings go on. The COC would also declare that the cable was installed acording to 3000, also something you can't see once the lining goes on.

Usually when the whole job is completed by one firm it all goes together on one certificate. If parts of the work are sub-contracted then multiple certificates will clearly define the extents of responsibility.

When I checked the regs it got me wondering about the time factor.

In this particular instance I'm looking at taking over a partially completed shop fitout and chasing the other firm for a certificate to cover their work. If they can't or won't supply then it will be a case of start again.

Jan 03 2018 09:52

Look closely at the wording of applicable ESRs.
They require that the PEW be certified, but they are silent as to who certifies the work.
ESR 69, specifying C0C-related offences, doesn't include "failing to certify".

It's very similar for testing, which must come before certification because if PEW hasn't been tested (as specified)then it can't have been done "lawfully & safely" (the declaration on the CoC).

ESRs treat connection to supply as being the "crunch point". The person connecting has to sight the relevant CoCs, and if the CoCs are not there to be sighted, the work is simply not permitted to be connected.

So in a case like yours, taking over a half-done job, there is no legal obligation on the first worker to certify what they did. That leaves you two choices:
- certify it yourself (if you're feeling brave enough after due diligence);
- refuse to connect it.

Perhaps explain to the customer why you are not prepared to certify work by others that you have no detailed knowledge of, and leave it to them to chase the original installer. But their relationship has probably already broken down, else you would not have been called in.

What the customer wants is the same finished installation as they were after when it all started, but the road-map to get there has changed hugely and your contract to "finish" is not the same as the original contract (unless you choose to start over).
To "finish" a half-done job you either need those CoCs, or you need to take enough time to check the work so thoroughly that you are happy to certify it yourself. That might include not just the physical aspects, but also the personal (eg was the original worker duly licensed?).
The customer will not understand any of this, they just want the finished installation. So you'll need to explain why it's going to cost them extra. But if they've decided that the original sparky is not suitable for finishing, then they should understand your reluctance to just accept responsibility for what the original sparky did.


Jan 03 2018 11:57

Thanks AlecK. The client is also taking over the space and their requirements are somewhat different to what was in progress. So I'm not concerned about the final sub circuits as they will be removed. It would be handy if the 16mm feed from the MSB to the unfinished DB in the shop was covered by a certificate I could rely on.

In any case I'm expecting that the work was carried out more than six months ago, so certificate or not, it'll all receive a thorough going over.

Jan 03 2018 13:05

Yes 6 months having elapsed is relevant, because for issuing both ESC and CoC you can only rely on a CoC if issued less than 6 months previous. So for long-term delays, even if the original CoCs have been issued and are available, they can't cover your bum.
Not sure that was the intent, but it's the effect. Eg if someone laid an underground submain "for later use" and certified it, after 6 months the CoC is nearly worthless to the person who comes along to install some load and connect to supply.