18th Edition

Have a search around in this forum for discussions concerning whether the Regs are retrospective.

Introduction to BS 7671:2018


... Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the Regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading.

still OK for use by the public that now does not now compile with 18th edition.


If you are signing an 18th EICR, record as a deviation and unsatisfactory and let the recipient, possibly local council. make the decision.


You are being asked to accept the risk and consequences of any incident and need to be prepared (and insured to give advice for a fee) to explain why you considered the new safety measures in the 18th to not be necessary.


Regards


BOD

Except for a few cases where other laws (examples include the new one about rented property, or the ESCQR) refer to a specific edition of the wiring regs. there is no legal duty for anything else to comply to BS7671.


But, and it is a very big but, there is a requirement for it to be safe, and if it came to it, safe not in your judgement, but in the eyes of the HSE and/or an expert witness if there was an accident.


One very good way of making sure it is deemed safe in such a case, is for it to meet the current edition of the wiring regs. If it doesn't then the person responsible for the installation needs to be able to show that it does meet a suitable standard of safety in respect of the bits that do not comply.

Your role as inspector is to pass this information on, to the owners so that risk assessment can be done,and the risk can be mitigated, either by changing the sockets or showing that they are in some other way not accessible to the same degree as if they were shutterred.

(In your example the shutters thing is all about children's fingers when the plug is removed and the live socket is left open. If the sockets are in some way locked in the connected position, or locked shut when not in use, then one may consider that this very specific risk has been removed in another way, which may be considered equivalent)

The short answer is it is not always OK to leave things as they were, but it often is, it is a case by case basis, and relies on some solid engineering judgement based on local knowledge.


Mike

Thank you for the replies and good information given. I can see in many situations there would be no need to change/upgrade the hook ups due to reg changes, ie if they where still electrically and mechanically safe but as you point out the lack of an interlocked switch does raise issues that in my opinion can't be justified by citing the the old regs.

Thanks again for for help and advice.


Steve

There is another point here. The cable connector (the socket end of the cable) is not and cannot be interlocked. Whether the interlocked socket is really safer is difficult to determine, because getting a shock from a BS EN 60309 socket with RCD protection is pretty difficult because the socket contacts are well recessed, so contact with both live conductors and not earth requires significant skill (or possibly stupidity), such as pushing wires into the socket. I would code this as C3, it is not unsatisfactory, or in reality any worse than the other end of the hookup cable. It would be quite difficult to argue that one end is safe and the other dangerous because of a paperwork change. Practically it is much more likely that the caravan end is pulled out and dropped into a puddle (by mistake at night) or similar.

I wasn't aware that the shed puller's lead formed part of an EICR............


Regards


BOD