What makes an EICR unsatisfactory?
An EICR is unsatisfactory if it contains any C1, any C2, or any FI observation. That’s the whole rule. A report with only C3 observations — “improvement recommended” — is satisfactory. One word, one test: is there anything dangerous, potentially dangerous, or unknown on the installation?
The codes that fail a report
- C1 — danger present. Risk of injury as it stands. Immediate action required. One C1 makes the report unsatisfactory.
- C2 — potentially dangerous. A realistic path to harm under normal use or a foreseeable fault. Urgent remedial action. One C2 makes the report unsatisfactory.
- FI — further investigation required. You couldn’t determine the condition without more work. “Unknown” isn’t “fine” — an FI makes the report unsatisfactory too.
The code that doesn’t
C3 — improvement recommended. The installation departs from the current edition of BS 7671, but nothing is dangerous. C3s are advisory. A report can carry a page of C3s and still be satisfactory — you note them, recommend the improvements, and everyone goes home.
Where sparks get in bother
The trap is coding something C3 to dodge an awkward landlord conversation. If a defect is potentially dangerous, it’s a C2 — and your signature says the installation was potentially dangerous when you inspected it. Down-coding to keep the report “satisfactory” and the customer happy is exactly the decision that ends up in front of someone official. Code what you found, cite the reg, let the status follow.
What “unsatisfactory” means next
For a rented property in England, an unsatisfactory report starts a 28-day clock: the remedial work coded C1, C2 or FI must be completed and confirmed in writing. For an owner-occupier it’s a strong recommendation rather than a legal deadline — but the danger is the same regardless of who owns the building. The code reflects the installation, not the paperwork convenience of anyone involved.