Exposed: Cash for logos and drive by inspections

I am doing certificates and have pulled up the observation sheet for the EICR that I said about above, eighteen C3 observations eleven of which would be resolved by replacing the consumer units, but the landlord doesn't want to pay for unnecessary work by updating an old electrical installation, such as providing RCD protection for his tenants electric shower.

Is that in spirit and intent of the legislation?

After fourteen years and four copies of the Wiring Regulations, red, green, yellow, blue and brown along with another three C&G Wiring Regulations courses and exams, how come this is deemed acceptable when the legislation specifically refers to the 18th Edition?

electrical.theiet.org/.../section-701.pdf

I am doing certificates and have pulled up the observation sheet for the EICR that I said about above, eighteen C3 observations eleven of which would be resolved by replacing the consumer units, but the landlord doesn't want to pay for unnecessary work by updating an old electrical installation, such as providing RCD protection for his tenants electric shower.

Is that in spirit and intent of the legislation?

After fourteen years and four copies of the Wiring Regulations, red, green, yellow, blue and brown along with another three C&G Wiring Regulations courses and exams, how come this is deemed acceptable when the legislation specifically refers to the 18th Edition?

electrical.theiet.org/.../section-701.pdf

You'd not condemn a building from 14 years ago, and require it to be rebuilt ? This is the electrical equivalent, an installation that is not even  middle aged,  as we can expect moderately loaded PVC wiring to serve for over a century.

Now 14 years ago we were not in the habit of stepping over the dead body of the previous user to take a shower,  so we cannot argue that the need to update is pressing, the regs change is more one of ensuring best practice on new work. The intent being that slowly, as CUs are changed or showers fail and are replaced, then RCDs will be added. 

In 40 to 50 years time I expect a shower sans RCD to be a rare thing, but not unknown, much as lighting circuits without CPC are today - being also 50 years or so behind the regs.  For comparison, the 2 pin power circuits without CPC went  from the regs in the 1940s,  about 30 years prior  to the lighting case, most of those have now gone, but there were still plenty in service in the 1970s ( I know I played with the as a kid..) Changing the regs formally starts the process, before that it is only the keen early adopters, but the actual change is only pretty much universal half a century later.

Mike.

Morning Mike

In the case of buildings you may not need/want to rebuild them but you would want flammable cladding removed from a HRRB wouldn't you?

As for your 14 year old installation aside from any non-compliances that would attract a C3 due to new safety measures introduced by each edition of BS 7671 you make the assumption that the installation was compliant at the time of installation which we know a substantial number have test certificates written by Pinocchio. 

In the case of the Emma Shaw fatal accident case the 42 18 month old flats all had fabricated test results with the the electricians mate confessing, when interviewed under caution at the police station, he was not competent to inspect and test and had no qualifications and the test certificates were written up in the site hut with fabricated readings. He also said that in evidence to the coroner.

I tested some years ago 5 brand new houses on an ex MOD site in Essex for a charity before they were let to tenants. All 5 failed my I&T with series non-compliances despite the toilet paper test certificates.

How about an I&T I did on a brand new operating theatre with no 710 provisions at all and the test certificate saying N/A for special locations?

Why on a rare occasion I have I&T an installation I am not finding much to record do I say to myself, "Come on John wake up and get your backside in to gear and concentrate on what you are doing"? 

I do not do much I&T now concentrating more on design, consultancy and work for the IET. I did do an investigation on a tower block, same cladding as Grenfell Tower, post fire where 10 people went to hospital. I did a lot of writing in my report!

What the reporter said in his article was just the tip of the iceberg.

I'm not disputing that there are problems, - actually the cladding example  is closer to the case of actually we did step over some bodies getting into the shower, and something needs to be done on a faster timescale than the usual steering of a supertanker speed.   But of course that example never really met the rules in place at that time either - lots of new rules are not needed. Understanding and following the fire zone and partition rules already in place at the time would have been a jolly good start.  And sadly, it looks like a rapid response on that one is still going to be about a decade.

The other cases you raise are sort of my first point - if folk get a taste for not bothering to either understand or think about one set of rules, they are likely to extend the same attitude to the rest.

And because testing is a faff, and mostly things  seem to work perfectly OK without it, the temptation is to skimp. Of course the same is true of earthing, covers on missing ways in consumer units  and a load of other stuff, the slope is slippery.

The folk playing EICR results bingo are not helping, and can make it more dangerous - if they were not there at least we would know it had not been inspected, instead of having a tick for something dangerous.

(Would you be more careful of a car known never to have been  MOT tested or one with a certificate that you thought was genuine, but in fact was not ?  Personally I'd rather not have any test than the fake test and fake cert. then I can make a more informed judgement not be lulled into false security. )

Far better then to have something so simple that ordinary folk can tell it has not been done and then organize it properly - the current system lacks teeth, but even if it had them it also lacks the direction to know when and where to bite.

Mike.