What you really don't want is a couple of 3-bar heaters plugged into the one and only double socket.

You can never really have too many sockets nowadays. Multi-way extension leads daisy-chained behind desks, etc. is not ideal. I put 4 doubles for each desk in my daughter's house. They do get used!

I wouldn't get too worried about a C3 unless there are ridiculously few. Like all C3s, they should not be ignored for ever.

"The installation is safe and (except where noted) meets the meets regs requirements"

"The installation is sensible for its intended purpose"

are not quite the same.

One is an EICR, the other is an assessment of the likely user.

The whole point of having two sorts of inspection is that the condition report is focused primarily on  the former.

Mike

mapj1 said:

"The installation is safe and (except where noted) meets the meets regs requirements"

"The installation is sensible for its intended purpose"

are not quite the same.

One is an EICR, the other is an assessment of the likely user.

The whole point of having two sorts of inspection is that the condition report is focused primarily on  the former.

Interestingly, and pedantically, the objective of the periodic inspection & testing is NEITHER of the above. Specifically, as described in Regulation 651.1, it is to determine, so far as is reasonably practicable, whether the installation is in a satisfactory condition for continued service.

Whether the installation has sufficient socket-outlets in a particular room "for continued service" is, therefore, a VERY pertinent question.

As I said in an earlier post, if a domestic installation has existing occupants who appear to be happy with the existing provision (and to be using the installation safely), there is no problem ... but if there is a change of occupancy, particularly in rented accommodation, the objective of the EICR provides a different answer ?

gkenyon said:

As I said in an earlier post, if a domestic installation has existing occupants who appear to be happy with the existing provision (and to be using the installation safely), there is no problem ... but if there is a change of occupancy, particularly in rented accommodation, the objective of the EICR provides a different answer ?

So you have a nonagenarian who has a wired in phone and no PC, printer, or mobile (with charger), etc. He or she dies and suddenly the installation becomes unsafe. Difficult to see how that could be the case, but I do take the point.

That said, it may be that my work-place (in the public sector) has become unsafe. A couple of years ago, the papers were literally papers, but now they are digital, so that is 3 sockets for 3 PCs. There is equipment for remote dealings and recording equipment, so that is another 3 sockets. Some of the team plug in their own laptops. The end result is a tangle of cables at one's feet, which hardly seems safe, let alone comfortable.

gkenyon said:

As I said in an earlier post, if a domestic installation has existing occupants who appear to be happy with the existing provision (and to be using the installation safely), there is no problem ... but if there is a change of occupancy, particularly in rented accommodation, the objective of the EICR provides a different answer ?

So you have a nonagenarian who has a wired in phone and no PC, printer, or mobile (with charger), etc. He or she dies and suddenly the installation becomes unsafe. Difficult to see how that could be the case, but I do take the point.

That said, it may be that my work-place (in the public sector) has become unsafe. A couple of years ago, the papers were literally papers, but now they are digital, so that is 3 sockets for 3 PCs. There is equipment for remote dealings and recording equipment, so that is another 3 sockets. Some of the team plug in their own laptops. The end result is a tangle of cables at one's feet, which hardly seems safe, let alone comfortable.

Chris Pearson said:

and suddenly the installation becomes unsafe.

No, the installation potentially is unsuitable for continued service (without upgrades) for a modern family who move in afterwards to use safely ... at least without upgrades (hence potential C3, NOT C2)

I also pointed out that, depending on the purpose of the EICR, the person ordering it might actually want (or need) to know that there aren't as many socket-outlets as you'd expect these days ...

Chris Pearson said:

That said, it may be that my work-place (in the public sector) has become unsafe. A couple of years ago, the papers were literally papers, but now they are digital, so that is 3 sockets for 3 PCs. There is equipment for remote dealings and recording equipment, so that is another 3 sockets. Some of the team plug in their own laptops. The end result is a tangle of cables at one's feet, which hardly seems safe, let alone comfortable.

Yes, that does sort of demonstrate the point that it's down to circumstances.

... but it's all in the hands of the Competent Person who Carries Out the Inspection & Test.

(Unless we really do want a world with "computer says yes or no" type EICRs).