17th edition design given 18th edition certifcate

davezawadi (David Stone):

Interesting, so the installing electrician is responsible for all the stages, and then the QS has signed. In my view this does not meet the requirements of BS7671, as the design was presumably done by an unknown third party. In a build like this, the design (Circuits, positions of accessories, cable sizes CPD ratings, etc.) will usually be done by a designer working for the Architect and the Electrical sub-contractor does the work.

Ebee covered the cert bit earlier, as in the one signature for design/ construction/inspect+test. NICEIC forms have an additional signature box for QS , notionally for checking that the details on the cert are correct. It is a variation on the model forms in BS7671 simply for their rules of enrollment. 

The architect will know SFA about electrical installation. With new build domestic the designer will likely be the installing contractor. Anything else will be a disaster. The electrician will be given a spec simply as a plan of points of use, RCD on circuits and complying with BS7671.  The electrician will then have to plan and install this within the constraints of structure, BS7671, other trades and where stuff can realistically go. That is where the skill and expertise of a good sparky will always trump remote control.


 

I don't think that the NIC can do that and fully comply with BS7671. I want to know who exactly designed the install. When I find a problem of some kind, which I will, I want that person. I want to know who installed it, when that is a problem. I want to know exactly who tested it and passed the rubbish.

None of these persons need any skill or qualification at all, and may well be unaware of the requirements of BS7671.

Had to read that again, but surely you are not saying that the person signing for Design/construct/ I+T on a Installation Certificate does not need to have any skill or qualification and maybe unaware of BS7671 requirements?


NIC do not need to comply with BS7671, they are just a registration scheme. I am sure that the OP has said, in a roundabout way, that there are signatures. Some model form versions allow for multiple "designers", but from the limited info I do not think that has happened here. It is simply an issue of 17/18th forms and someone in error of not crossing out the BS7671:2018 bit and putting in BS7671: 2017 instead. The OP did say they were written certificates. So really just a clerical error; pales into insignificance to some of the grossly outdated cut and paste approach to designs and documents churned out by so called "professional" designers, surveyors, consultants and architects. I still get proposals from Architects and Surveyors referencing the 16th edition. It is the end Electrician that has to sort all this out.


If you want "full compliance with something" you are only going to get that with prescription by law and for there to be a deterrent. That is not going to happen. As with all things, applicable to all trades and contractors in construction and, generally, in provision of services for reward in society, it is a free market . Take Glenfall type cladding as one example of that and some consumer unit manufactures using the cheapest components possible as another. This list will never be exhaustive. It is a market economy where the encouragement is to get away with what you can to maximise profit and avoid being found out, or at a minimum, to have an opportunity to actually have some kind of turnover to tick over. Even if you are found out, you can always claim you were testing your eyesight. You do mostly get what you are prepared to pay for. No one is going to pay for every electrician to be EngTech the same as no one is going to pay gig economy nursing home carer's a living wage and pay for the time they really need for them to do the job correctly.


edited for weird spelling








 

As a belated update to this the NICIEC eventually attended twice after some sockets were shown to have been terminated through the sleeve of CPC and that a switch fuse  to protect tails was added without any testing.

The design was a copy from another development, 24 way dual RCD board using type AC rcds, 1 spare way. These rcd groups included an ev charger and no effort to split the lighting resulting in the whole house in darkness during a fault. Earth leakage was measured presumably from included modern devices and the led lighting.

The certificate has been reissued after circuit rearrangement as best as possible and ev charger made good. 

An outstanding issue is that the real maximum demand could very easily hammer the switch fuse rating if the ev charger is used for a few hours. Now that the circuits have been rearranged the max load on one rcd group is quite high, above the rating of the rcd without diversity, and the switch fuse is down rated compared service head fuse by a lot, so stuck as upgrading it would bring it past the rating of the rcd. (Niceic no longer interested).

All in all messy and a disappointing affair and has left me shocked at the state of the industry in certain areas.