You don’t need to do anything, C1/C2 need sorting to get a satisfactory cert, C3 will not make a cert unsatisfactory. The regs are not retrospective as otherwise we would be changing every board for not having SPD/AFDD being plastic.

Based on my understanding, the original question pertained to an alternative approach when faced with plastic consumer units that do not meet the current BS 7671 standard for domestic installations. While it’s true that no immediate action is required, and a C3 recommendation will not render the certification unsatisfactory, improvement is recommended, hence the previous suggestions. 

As someone else has mentioned it might not even need to be a C3, unless it’s in an escape route/under stairs and no signs of thermal damage, then no code would be needed. Be interesting to know the setting of the consumer unit.

Indeed, knowing the consumer unit’s designation would help. However, it appears that the inspector has identified potential safety improvements could be possible, as evidenced by the attached C3 code. Is the presence of a wooden staircase and its location along an escape route the sole criterion for issuing a C3 observation? I am curious if there might be additional factors contributing to this classification.

Is the absence of the previous Observation Code 4, (Periodic Test & Inspection document) which addressed non-compliance with current regulations, a matter that warrants reconsideration?

As an advocate for thoroughness, I advocate for Condition Reports to be structured akin to technical reports rather than overly simplified documents. Elaborating on each observation, rather than relying on concise one-liners, ensures clarity and precision. It is essential to recognise that even domestic installations possess technical intricacies that may confound those without specialised training.

Moreover, in my opinion, it is justifiable to inform property owners that their existing arrangement no longer aligns with current standards, particularly in light of past consumer unit fires. Additionally, raising awareness about contemporary safety enhancements such as Type A RCDs, AFDDs, and SPDs serves to enhance overall safety consciousness. 

Even if it’s just added to the additional notes section 

If you moved into a house with that CU what would you do?

I doubt that any of us would put modernising it at the top of our to do list, so not a C1 or C2. However, I think that it would be pencilled in lower down, so that makes it a C3.

For me, it is as much to do with split load (presumably type AC RCDs) and lack of SPD protection as the fire rating. In essence the recommendation is simply to bring it up to the current standard, so I find it difficult not to grade C3.

Of course, it might be 20 years until you get round to the upgrade. 

If you moved into a house with that CU what would you do?

I doubt that any of us would put modernising it at the top of our to do list, so not a C1 or C2. However, I think that it would be pencilled in lower down, so that makes it a C3.

For me, it is as much to do with split load (presumably type AC RCDs) and lack of SPD protection as the fire rating. In essence the recommendation is simply to bring it up to the current standard, so I find it difficult not to grade C3.

Of course, it might be 20 years until you get round to the upgrade. 

I agreed. Don’t you think  that this scenario bears resemblance to the absence of a Circuit Protective Conductor in a lighting circuit equipped solely with Class 2 accessories, which also falls under the C3 classification. One would seek this information proactively before enlisting a friend to install a new Class 1 fitting, much as one would verify that their consumer unit is constructed of plastic prior to introducing an additional load such as a hot tub (As small as 13 amp plugged in) that could potentially subject the existing consumer unit to thermal stress and lead to a fire outbreak within the unit.