EWS1 B1 rating non-chartered engineer

iamlovinit05

Hi everyone,

I am in the process of buying a flat in London (had an offer accepted and instructed solicitors) and have applied for my mortgage as well. Prior to offering on the flat, i made sure that the property had a completed EWS1 form - it had got a B1 rating.

However, I got rejected from the mortgage as the lender is saying that the signatory of the EWS1 is non suitably qualified - he is a member of the IFE but not a chartered member. 

I've been going back and forth with the estate agent (who has been going back and forth with the managing agent of the property), and they are of the view that there is no requirement for the signatory to be a chartered member (the emphasis on the wording below is "expertise" and the chartered designation is just a suggestion.

My mortgage broker says this is the first time has come across this situation and did some research on lender's lending policies and says he can find a few that should be fine to lend. However, I am a bit worried that even if I can get financing now:

• Lenders could change their policy in the future and I am unable to remortgage / sell
• The B1 rating could drop to a B2 if a chartered engineer takes a different view which could lead to a big remediation bill 

Has anyone been in the same situation / have any views on this?

Thanks!

Exact wording on the EWS1 form
For Option B, the signatory would need a higher level of expertise in the assessment of the fire risk presented by external wall materials. For Institution of Fire Engineers (IFE) members, this should be a Chartered or Incorporated Engineer with full membership of the Institution. For non-IFE members, the signatory should be a fully qualified member of a relevant professional body that deals with fire safety in the built environment, with either actual or equivalence to the Chartered or Incorporated Engineer status. 

RecoveringAndy

iamlovinit05 said:

 For Institution of Fire Engineers (IFE) members, this should be a Chartered or Incorporated Engineer with full membership of the Institution.  

That's the line of importance here. The engineer is an IFE member so that statement applies. However, they are not Chartered / Incorporated. For IFE members there is no "equivalent experience" caveat. Therefore, I would suggest that the EWS1 form is invalid.

For what it's worth, I would do some checking. It's relatively uncommon (but not unheard of) for an engineer to be a full member with an institution without also meeting the UK-SPEC for the engineering council to at least IEng level. Perhaps the form just didn't include all of the engineer's details?

iamlovinit05

RecoveringAndy said:

iamlovinit05 said:

 For Institution of Fire Engineers (IFE) members, this should be a Chartered or Incorporated Engineer with full membership of the Institution.  

That's the line of importance here. The engineer is an IFE member so that statement applies. However, they are not Chartered / Incorporated. For IFE members there is no "equivalent experience" caveat. Therefore, I would suggest that the EWS1 form is invalid.

For what it's worth, I would do some checking. It's relatively uncommon (but not unheard of) for an engineer to be a full member with an institution without also meeting the UK-SPEC for the engineering council to at least IEng level. Perhaps the form just didn't include all of the engineer's details?

Thanks for your reply - I've checked the IFE directory (I can't post the link as I am too new here!) and unfortunately can't find his name in this list (that contains all the IEng or CEng with the IFE in the UK i believe). His qualification as listed on the EWS1 form is "EngTech MiFireE" and is a Member  of the IFE but not chartered / incorporated.

Think luck isn't on my side then?

RecoveringAndy

Ok, EngTech stands for "Engineering Technician".   It suggests to me (as a CEng) that they are working at a lower level than a standard "Engineer" role or are working through qualifications.

I would also suggest that being an EngTech in itself proves that this person does not hold suitable experience / qualifications in lieu of Chartered status. They're in the system so they would upgrade if they could.

I would stand firm with the estate agent and work on the assumption that there is no EWS1 form. Whoever put the form together may be the best engineer in the country but if the form explicitly contradicts itself it won't stand up to scrutiny. You may have issues down the line if you wish to sell.

You may feel it appropriate to raise it with the IFE if someone un(der)qualified is signing off on these. An email to them may result in more specific answers. (I'm not a Fire Safety Engineer)

iamlovinit05

RecoveringAndy said:

Ok, EngTech stands for "Engineering Technician".   It suggests to me (as a CEng) that they are working at a lower level than a standard "Engineer" role or are working through qualifications.

I would also suggest that being an EngTech in itself proves that this person does not hold suitable experience / qualifications in lieu of Chartered status. They're in the system so they would upgrade if they could.

I would stand firm with the estate agent and work on the assumption that there is no EWS1 form. Whoever put the form together may be the best engineer in the country but if the form explicitly contradicts itself it won't stand up to scrutiny. You may have issues down the line if you wish to sell.

You may feel it appropriate to raise it with the IFE if someone un(der)qualified is signing off on these. An email to them may result in more specific answers. (I'm not a Fire Safety Engineer)

Thanks - super helpful. Does indeed seem there is a genuine risk that the EWS assessment for this development has not been done properly and there could be risks / issues down the line so might be best if i pull out.

Just super weird that it seems "anyone" can just sign the forms and have no repercussions for being un(der)qualified.
If anything goes wrong, the buyer bears the blunt & the cost.

RecoveringAndy

Having now read through the EWS1 form guidance, it's quite clear that an EngTech should not have signed off on this.

"• I meet the professional body membership and competence criteria as described in Note 3."

ews1-form-5.3.21_final_clean2.pdf (rics.org)

I would encourage you to send an email to the IFE to raise a concern here. Others may not be so eagle eyed. Just bring it to their attention. No need for you to chase it, I'm sure they'll have a look.

iamlovinit05

RecoveringAndy said:

Having now read through the EWS1 form guidance, it's quite clear that an EngTech should not have signed off on this.

"• I meet the professional body membership and competence criteria as described in Note 3."


I would encourage you to send an email to the IFE to raise a concern here. Others may not be so eagle eyed. Just bring it to their attention. No need for you to chase it, I'm sure they'll have a look.

Have done that already - Thanks for your help & appreciate it.