This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Best practices

Hi all can someone please give me some advice on the following? 

 

  1. say you’re maintaining a circuit and you realise parts of the circuits do not comply to the regulations what is the standard procedure for example ZS values that do not comply or IR that’s too low. I know in the industrial setting we are pressured to keep things going (critical kit) but say even if we’ve got it in writing we’ve said it’s potentially dangerous and we’ve been told in writing to switch it back on who is then at fault?

 

  1. say the circuit is an old installation and complied at the time of installation if we were then doing work on that circuit say for instance changing adding a spur to sockets that aren’t RCD protected what is the protocol with regards to bringing it up to current standard? 

 

Parents
  • Q1: as an employee, you can rely upon the doctrine of vicarious liability. Mind you, it would trouble my conscience considerably to re-energise an installation which I considered unsafe.

    Q2: your new spur should be RCD protected at its origin. You have no liability for the rest of the installation. In short, the work which you do should comply.

    There is legislation which aims to protect whistle-blowers, but I would not rely upon it.

    I admire the way in which you bring these issues to the forum. Good luck!

Reply
  • Q1: as an employee, you can rely upon the doctrine of vicarious liability. Mind you, it would trouble my conscience considerably to re-energise an installation which I considered unsafe.

    Q2: your new spur should be RCD protected at its origin. You have no liability for the rest of the installation. In short, the work which you do should comply.

    There is legislation which aims to protect whistle-blowers, but I would not rely upon it.

    I admire the way in which you bring these issues to the forum. Good luck!

Children
No Data