EICR C2 on missing RCDs on existing installation

If the property is in England, then the relevant legislation is https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/312/introduction/made, The Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020. Section 2 specifically calls out BS7671:2018 (which is the 18th Edition Wiring Regulations, not including any subsequent amendments).  If the IET and BSI choose to release a 19th Edition, then the law will still only require inspection against the 18th, until the government decides to change the law.

Your problem is that anything that was done pre-2018 is likely to be not strictly compliant. And it then comes down to the opinion of the inspecting electrician whether that's a C3 (doesn't strictly comply, but not unsafe) or C2 (doesn't comply, needs fixing).

There's nothing to stop you showing the EICR to any other electrician and asking for a quote to fix all the C2s.  If all the other electrics are fine, a new consumer unit may well bring it up to standard.

Simon Barker said:

f the IET and BSI choose to release a 19th Edition, then the law will still only require inspection against the 18th, until the government decides to change the law.

Your problem is that anything that was done pre-2018 is likely to be not strictly compliant. And it then comes down to the opinion of the inspecting electrician whether that's a C3 (doesn't strictly comply, but not unsafe) or C2 (doesn't comply, needs fixing).

It would probably be best to get legal advice on the first point, as the below example of plugs demonstrates.

Overall, it's not reasonable for an installation (or a version of a standard) to be considered safe indefinitely.

In terms of the specific version of BS 7671 cited in the legislation, it is my understanding this doesn't mean you forever have to use that version of the standard in respect of the legislation, but it would be up to a court of law to decide that a later version ought not to be adopted for a particular case.

Just as an example, the Plugs and Sockets (Safety) Regulations 1994 quote standards current at the time the legislation was enacted ... does that mean that plugs, socket-outlets and adaptors to the current versions of the standards fall foul of the legislation, and conversely it's OK to continue using standards from 1994 ... well, no !

I agree that the second point could be considered either subjective, or dependent on circumstances, and overall there is no "rule" ... as I said above, there is industry guidance for reference, but it's down to an opinion at the end of the day.

gkenyon said:

In terms of the specific version of BS 7671 cited in the legislation, it is my understanding this doesn't mean you forever have to use that version of the standard in respect of the legislation, but it would be up to a court of law to decide that a later version ought not to be adopted for a particular case.

Courts interpret legislation and make judgments accordingly. They cannot change the law, so I agree with Simon that until (strictly speaking) Parliament decides to change it, Regulation 2 must be followed as written - i.e. the 18th Edn applies.

What is arguable is whether corrigenda and amendments are to be included. Against is the principle that legislation is not ambulatory; in favour is the fact that the Big Brown Book has, "IET Wiring Regulations Eighteenth Edition" clearly written on the cover.

The Regulations concerning plugs are rather different inasmuch as only, "BS 1363" is mentioned: e.g. Regulation 8 and Schedule 2. Oddly, the 1987 version specifies BS 1363:1984 (Regulation 5 and Schedule 3).

Chris Pearson said:

Courts interpret legislation and make judgments accordingly. They cannot change the law, so I agree with Simon that until (strictly speaking) Parliament decides to change it, Regulation 2 must be followed as written - i.e. the 18th Edn applies.

Is that view the accepted legal practice, though (i.e. by case law)? I'm not a legal professional, so I won't make that statement (or advise of one contrary, without suitable disclaimer).

If you are correct, then all plugs, for example, would have to comply with standards back in 1994 ... None of the standards supported in the legislation acknowledged what we now know as "ISODs" ... insulated shutter operating devices, or "plastic earth pin".

But ... we have ISODs ...

Similarly, if the installation contains generators that operate in parallel with the grid ... or as a switched alternative, the ESQCR mandates the installation to conform to the 'British Standard Requirements' which is defined in Regulation 1 as BS 7671:2008 (17th Edition).

Hence, PRS would be in conflict with ESQCR (and vice-versa) if your interpretation were correct ? In fact, any installation to later Amendments or versions of BS 7671 than BS 7671:2008 would also conflict with ESQCR ?

This clearly can't be the case ...

Hence, I would ask a legal professional for their opinion on this issue, as to case-law and how this is really dealt with in real legal cases, rather than trying to interpret or theorise oneself.

PRS would be in conflict with ESQCR

The standards referenced might be in conflict, but surely, in the vast majority of cases, it's possible to design an installation that complies with both (or more) versions? It's rare that an update to a standard exactly contradicts a previous version on some particular point - e.g. making something mandatory that was prohibited before, or vice versa - but rather introducing some new options or closing off others - so most of the time the designer can readily choose something that complies with both.

Certainly it would be better if the politicians and mandarins could get their act together and keep everything simple and consistent, but they seem incapable of that, as a result many laws/regulations having differing requirements - we just have to find a way of complying with all of them at the same time.  II may be tedious and unwieldy at times, but usually it's possible.

If you are correct, then all plugs, for example, would have to comply with standards back in 1994 ... None of the standards supported in the legislation acknowledged what we now know as "ISODs" ... insulated shutter operating devices, or "plastic earth pin".

The earlier standard may not have considered or mentioned an ISOD, but unless it prohibited it in some way, couldn't current devices be said to effectively comply with both versions of the standard?

   - Andy.

AJJewsbury said:

The standards referenced might be in conflict, but surely, in the vast majority of cases, it's possible to design an installation that complies with both (or more) versions?

AJJewsbury said:

The earlier standard may not have considered or mentioned an ISOD, but unless it prohibited it in some way, couldn't current devices be said to effectively comply with both versions of the standard

I think that Andy has squared the circle.

So back to the OP, the C2 for no RCD protection on sockets (411.3.3) would have been the same under 17th Edn (although the exceptions have changed); and for the luminaires, 17th Edn was simply silent on the issue - there was no paragraph 411.3.4. Nothing in 17th Edn prohibited RCDs in areas where they were not required.

AJJewsbury said:

The standards referenced might be in conflict, but surely, in the vast majority of cases, it's possible to design an installation that complies with both (or more) versions?

AJJewsbury said:

The earlier standard may not have considered or mentioned an ISOD, but unless it prohibited it in some way, couldn't current devices be said to effectively comply with both versions of the standard

I think that Andy has squared the circle.

So back to the OP, the C2 for no RCD protection on sockets (411.3.3) would have been the same under 17th Edn (although the exceptions have changed); and for the luminaires, 17th Edn was simply silent on the issue - there was no paragraph 411.3.4. Nothing in 17th Edn prohibited RCDs in areas where they were not required.