Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 11 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 1376 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
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

Electrical Testing

Former Community Member
Former Community Member
When coding any consumer unit or switchgear with a combustible (plastic) enclosure only when it is located under a wooden staircase or within a sole route of escape, a C3 is recommended. 


Does this recommendation signify that the overall rating of the install be satisfactory or unsatisfactory? 


I have been ticking Unsatisfactory for the general condition of the installation (in terms of electrical safety) AND the overall assessment of the installation in terms of its continued use! 


Is wrong wrong of me? Even though everything is perfect with results and the installation?
  • 0
    The answer to this question is given on the model EICR on page 473 of BS 7671, which states in Section E:

     
    * An unsatisfactory assessment indicates that dangerous (code C1) and/or potentially dangerous (code C2) conditions have been identified.



    Therefore, if there are no C1 or C2, only C3 or FI, the result would, by application of simple logic, be SATISFACTORY unless the FI might lead to C1 or C2.


    Don't forget, though, that the forms in Appendix 6, along with the guidance for coding, are just that: guidance. However, you are either following the industry guidance or you are not.


    NOTE: Bold text above edited for clarity following John Peckham's post below regarding Note 9 on the reverse of the form.

  • 0
    Yes, it is wrong. You need to contact every customer where you have done this, apologise profusely, and pay for any work they have done in response to your faulty EICR. A C3 is satisfactory as you should know, it is just a recommendation that the C3 coded items should be considered carefully as not being to the current regulations, or similar difficulties with minor defects. This is crazy, what is happening to the world? Plastic domestic switchgear assemblies only become actually dangerous or potentially dangerous, C1 or C2, if they have loose connections or screws, which you should check for tightness. The location is irrelevant. You inspect for damage, burning or overheating, then you code the item if necessary. I assure you that you could be prosecuted under the EAWR by the HSE. I suggest your competence is inadequate to carry out EICRs.
  • 0
    Plastic consumer units in domestic household premises is a non compliance with BS 7671 see Regulation 421.1.201.


    I record them as a C3 regardless of location as it is a non-compliance and to cover my backside and protect my PI I record every non-compliance I find. This avoids the client saying or claiming at a later date "I would have done XYZ if only you had told me". C3 means improvement recommended so why not advise the client of this and leave it up to them if they want to do something about it?


    If I find any evidence of thermal damage then at least a C2 or in the extreme a C1.


    Your report, your signature and you take on the liability for your acts and omissions!


    I think Graham above may have typed the codings in the wrong sequence. Any C1, C2 or FI the EICR has to be "Unsatisfactory" . C3s, regardless of how many, then "Satisfactory".
  • 0
    gkenyon:

    The answer to this question is given on the model EICR on page 473 of BS 7671, which states in Section E:

     
    * An unsatisfactory assessment indicates that dangerous (code C1) and/or potentially dangerous (code C2) conditions have been identified.



    Therefore, if there are no C1 or C2, only C3 or FI, the result would, by application of simple logic, be SATISFACTORY.


    Don't forget, though, that the forms in Appendix 6, along with the guidance for coding, are just that: guidance. However, you are either following the industry guidance or you are not.


    I was taught that FI leads to unsatisfactory. It is difficult to see how an installation could be said to be satisfactory when further investigative work is required.


    Alternatively, perhaps one should simply not express an opinion in Section E.


    As far as the Electrical Safety Standards are concerned, FI is treated in the same way as remedial work - i.e. it must be done within 28 days. So in terms of the legislation FI = unsatisfactory.


    ETA: I was still thinking and typing when JP posted above. GK has quoted the model report correctly.


  • 0
    The OP is so out there, are we not sure that this and similar are not just a wind up?  If not a wind up, then we have reached ground zero.
  • 0
    Afternoon Chris


    I don't think so look at the Notes for the Report on Page 475 para 9 of the Big Blue Bumper Book of Fun.



    JP
  • 0
    John Peckham:

    Afternoon Chris


    I don't think so look at the Notes for the Report on Page 475 para 9 of the Big Blue Bumper Book of Fun.


    I am not disagreeing with you. I agree that the note makes it pretty clear.


  • 0
    Here is the note referred to above;

    "9. Where an observation requires further investigation (FI) because the inspection has revealed an apparent deficiency which could not, owing to the extent or limitations of the inspection, be fully identified and further investigation may reveal a code C1 or C2 item, this should be recorded within Section K, given the code FI and marked as unsatisfactory in Section E."


    So only if it may reveal a C1 or C2 code. If we know that the FI can only reveal a C3 code then it should be marked "satisfactory" along with the FI. Only example i can think of would be an FI for seeing if cables in trunking were adequately supported to prevent premature collapse. 

    In searching for a suitable C3 for the above i found this best practice guide bpg4-1.pdf (electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk) which says C3 for plastic CU under stairs or in escape route and no coding if not under stairs or in escape route.
  • 0
    So this is where the difference between FI, LIM, and "just a note about something" are not 100 % clearly understood.


    Yes, I agree that Note 9 says "if you feel an FI might lead to C1 or C2 you should mark as unsatisfactory", but that clearly does not say that "FI can only be used where you have a suspicion of C1 or C2" or "FI always leads to unsatisfactory".


    At the end of the day, though, this is only guidance: none of the "coding" is a requirement of Chapter 65, it's one way of meeting it, but not the only way.
  • 0
    So this is unsafe for continued use, MYNAMEIS-INUSE? How does your customer feel about your determination? Unsatisfactory? Did you explain fully, as a very experienced, highly qualified inspector? please let us know,  I am sure members are interested to hear your reasons. 

    Perhaps you can enlighten us what qualifications you need to become an inspector to carry out EICRs. Dont be shy, Mynameis-inuse. I look forward to your answers.


    Regards, UKPN

Community Rules & Guidelines