This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Can Zs at DB ever be less than the Zs of the feeding circuit?

Former Community Member
Former Community Member
I am reviewing an EICR recently issued for a building with several Distribution Boards feeding sub-Distribution Boards.

I have noted that in some instances, the figure recorded for 'Zs at this board' is significantly less than the Maximum Measured Zs for the circuit recorded on the feeding DB.

e.g. DB FF4 is recorded as being fed from DB FF1.  The feeding circuit to DB FF4 is recorded as having a Maximum measured Zs of 0.4 Ohm, but the 'Zs at this board' for FF4 is recorded as 0.05 Ohm - which is less than the 'Zs at this board' recorded for FF1 (0.08 Ohm) - and which, is in fact, in turn itself less than the 'Maximum measured Zs' for the circuit feeding it.  Can this be true or are there errors in the report?  I thought that cascaded Zs can only get larger due to the added impedance of the feeding circuits? This is not my primary area of expertise, but I am concerned that the EICR is being used to justify the upgrade of several circuits which have passed previous inspections with no problem (hope the resolution of the extracts from the EICR below are sufficient resolution to read)...

248ee514524cf5398885518b2007a96a-huge-image.png


b952bae4d3b1f32d959d675c6ede9a16-huge-image.png
05733e3016557d58306811936bac5e50-huge-image.png


Many thanks if anyone is able to confirm my concerns or otherwise put me straight...
Parents
  • For an installation that appears to have been installed around the 1960's the EICR from five years ago was remarkably free of observations, whilst the latest EICR has some unconvincing observations. 


    It appears that the contractor needs to reattend site to check some details and tidy up the report, if the contractor has not been paid the trustees have some leverage to help resolve the situation. Personally I carry a camera and take a considerable number of photographs whilst inspecting and testing, all dated stamped, should someone raise a question at least I can start emailing photos to back up my comments and conclusions. I actually have a camera I just use for EICRs and a routine that starts with taking a photo of the job sheet, followed by the exterior of the building, working through the I&T and finishing up with my notes. So if I said cables were leaching plasticiser I would have photos to prove it.


    If the contractor won't resolve the issues then you have little choice other than to commission another report, how you now choose another contractor is open to discussion, but I would not be surprised if the third report has a few observations on it unlike the one from five years ago, apart from anything else there have been changes in the Wiring Regulations over the last fifty years and the new EICR will be comparing it to the latest regulations.


    Regards legal action, what for? If the bill has not been paid and the trustees refuse to pay it, it would be up to the contractor to take the trustees to court for non-payment. If the bill has been paid it's up to the trustees to try and claim their costs back for having yet another EICR completed, if someone got in touch with me asking me to do an EICR and then potentially be an expert witness in court to prove the other EICR was inadequate I would decline the job, I have been an expert witness in court and for something like this it wouldn't be worth the hassle.


    The trustees are probably going to have to get another EICR produced by another contractor, who should be provided with a copy of the EICR from five years ago to work off, then when they have the new report decide what actions to take, unless the last contractor steps up and resolves the issues.


    Andy B.
Reply
  • For an installation that appears to have been installed around the 1960's the EICR from five years ago was remarkably free of observations, whilst the latest EICR has some unconvincing observations. 


    It appears that the contractor needs to reattend site to check some details and tidy up the report, if the contractor has not been paid the trustees have some leverage to help resolve the situation. Personally I carry a camera and take a considerable number of photographs whilst inspecting and testing, all dated stamped, should someone raise a question at least I can start emailing photos to back up my comments and conclusions. I actually have a camera I just use for EICRs and a routine that starts with taking a photo of the job sheet, followed by the exterior of the building, working through the I&T and finishing up with my notes. So if I said cables were leaching plasticiser I would have photos to prove it.


    If the contractor won't resolve the issues then you have little choice other than to commission another report, how you now choose another contractor is open to discussion, but I would not be surprised if the third report has a few observations on it unlike the one from five years ago, apart from anything else there have been changes in the Wiring Regulations over the last fifty years and the new EICR will be comparing it to the latest regulations.


    Regards legal action, what for? If the bill has not been paid and the trustees refuse to pay it, it would be up to the contractor to take the trustees to court for non-payment. If the bill has been paid it's up to the trustees to try and claim their costs back for having yet another EICR completed, if someone got in touch with me asking me to do an EICR and then potentially be an expert witness in court to prove the other EICR was inadequate I would decline the job, I have been an expert witness in court and for something like this it wouldn't be worth the hassle.


    The trustees are probably going to have to get another EICR produced by another contractor, who should be provided with a copy of the EICR from five years ago to work off, then when they have the new report decide what actions to take, unless the last contractor steps up and resolves the issues.


    Andy B.
Children
No Data