EICR certificate

Discussion in 'Electricians' Talk' started by PurpleRoses123, Jul 19, 2021.

  1. PurpleRoses123

    PurpleRoses123 New Member

    It's all confusing to me, I don't know much about it but I do know when people are trying to pull a fast one on me.

    It was obvious something was wrong when they all refused to give me his full name and qualifications. I've only found his name now due to me searching Facebook and LinkedIn.

    The electrician that came the other day was so taken a back by the fusebox. It is a single RCD and so cannot isolate lights, sockets etc.
    A Google search shows that it is an add on box suitable for a garage or similar.

    I've been told by another electrician that this is technically safe but that the landlord has done a very cheap job indeed.

    Council aren't up on the regs either just taken everything at face value, at least yesterday they have finally started listening to me!
     
  2. adgjl

    adgjl Member

    There is nothing technically wrong with one RCD - after all, you only have one supply into the property, and can get power cuts. It is not ideal, but not necessarily unsafe - that is what an EICR should tell you. Unfortunately a lot use an EICR as a tool to justify what work needs to be done. To this end, if the company doing the inspection and testing are aware they may not / will not get the repair works, you may get a better answer.
     
    PurpleRoses123 likes this.
  3. MGW

    MGW Screwfix Select

    The scheme providers may say that, but not the IET, they withdrew code 4, an EICR may have a reference to the part which is breached, but the "Does not comply with current edition of regulations" code was withdraw from the code list, it was code 4.
    There is I agree nothing to stop an inspector listing all the "Does not comply with current edition of regulations" under code C3, which is recommended improvements. Also the IET standard forms do include some of the regulation numbers, a good example is where the requirement to bond everything in a bathroom was removed, on condition it has RCD protection.

    In the main on these pages the complaint is the reverse, a landlord is complaining that an EICR is showing code C2 when it should only be code C3. And code C2 is "potentially dangerous" and all 230 volt is potentially dangerous so hard to say wrong.

    However poor coding has been going on for years, and until the new law, it did not matter, the inspector had informed the client what faults there were, and the client decided what needed doing, and it did not matter if C2 or C3 and FI or LIM it was want was found that mattered not the coding.

    The regulations are not without some ambiguity, take one of the simple ones "314.1 Every installation shall be divided into circuits" and it continues "(iii) take account of danger that may arise from the failure of a single circuit such as a lighting circuit (iv) reduce the possibility of unwanted tripping of RCDs due to excessive protective conductor currents produced by equipment in normal operation" this brings into question "Circuit. An assembly of electrical equipment supplied from the same origin and protected against overcurrent by
    the same protective device(s)." the word in question is "overcurrent" and does a RCD protect against overcurrent to earth? If the RCD is an overcurrent device, which it would seem it is when reference is made to the RCD in the regulation, then using a single RCD is clearly not following the regulations by not dividing the installation into circuits, and it is questionable as to even with two RCD's it complies, however a single 100 mA RCD has been used for years with TT supplies without problem, the problems only started when we went to 30 mA RCD.

    I am NOT saying right or wrong, what I am saying it is down to the inspector to decide, there may be guidance this PDF for example says what the Electrical safety council thinks but the inspector does not need to follow what it says, I feel for example in-service electrical equipment is beyond my remit when doing an EICR, and this upload_2021-7-24_9-17-30.png inadequate provision of socket outlets is not part of an EICR.

    We today have a big problem with RCD protection and TN-C-S supplies, in the main hinged around the electric car, but also includes solar panels, and even the central heating boiler, where manufacturers recommend a type of RCD. On one EV charging point we see in the instructions
    this is clearly a problem for an EICR inspector as he is unlikely to be able to "see detail on packaging" as that will be long gone.

    So I see no way an inspector can be brought to task either for giving a code C2 instead of code C3 or a code C3 instead of a code C2, it is up to him/her what code he issues, code C1 different that is more cut and dried, but code C2 and C3 have always been contentious issues as it is left to the inspector as to what he feels should be issued. The same with FI and LIM.

    The EICR as it stands is not fit for the job of MOTing the rental properties electrical system. And never has been.
     
  4. Comlec

    Comlec Screwfix Select

    The landlord only needed to check https://www.electricalcompetentperson.co.uk/ This clearly shows contractors who are both CPS members AND able to carry out PRS inspections.

    in this case this simple check would flag the contractor as not registered as competent and would require the landlord to make further checks to confirm the competence of the contractor.
     
  5. MGW

    MGW Screwfix Select

    There is nothing in the new law to say that, it says
    I have my C&G 2391 among a host of other qualifications so in theory there is no reason why I should not do an EICR, in practice I wouldn't as I don't have the insurance in place, and not worth it for a one off job.

    This is the problem, if technically safe, then very little you can do.

    What it needed was for the government not IET or BSi to set out a minimum standard. It is possible there is a minimum standard, consumer protection laws and health and safety laws do lay down requirements, as does CENELECT who have published harmonization documents which in the main are included in the latest edition of BS 7671. Not sure if CENELECT rules are still law now we have left the EU?

    We have this guide but it is a guide not the law.

    In the guide it says the landlord can cover him self by requiring the inspector to sign a checklist certifying their competence, including their experience, whether they have adequate insurance and hold a qualification covering the current version of the Wiring Regulations and the periodic inspection, testing and certification of electrical installations.

    Before the law was passed it was rumoured that there would be an official checklist, but that did not happen, some agents have produced their own, but nothing official has been drawn up.

    To claim to have qualifications or be a member of an organisation when one is not is against the law, but with no real experience there is nothing to stop any person saying I am an electrician I will do the EICR. Yes I agree that seems wrong, but there is really know way to prove some one is not skilled. Proving they are skilled yes, be it member of a guild, union, or scheme provider, or qualifications, however only after level 3 do people have the option to put letters behind their name, and most tradesman are only level 3, so unlikely to get even Joe Blogs Fdeng. And even if you did it only says an engineering degree it does not say what part of engineering, it could be in sound broadcast.

    So the data base will show who is qualified but not who is not.

    So looking at
    it seems your unlikely to be able to force anyone to update what you have.

    I wish that was not the case, but to say otherwise would mean you doing a lot of work with little chance of getting anywhere.
     
    PurpleRoses123 likes this.
  6. PurpleRoses123

    PurpleRoses123 New Member

    Thank you

    It's not so much the single RCD that bothers me, it clearly works as the oven kept tripping it out but since a new oven has been installed its perfectly fine. Not ideal and annoying that the whole house goes off BUT it does the job and really in a way is no worse than a power cut.....providing the landlord can come fix things sharpish. Don't fancy my chest freezer being off for a weekend!

    But anyway, my issue is the EICR itself, it was clearly not done correctly, it was done in under an hour and faulty sockets were missed.

    As a good paying tennant I think I deserve to have a certificate that is correct and a job that has been done properly.

    As I keep saying, putting a random man in court based on his signature because my child was electrocuted.....that gives me very little reassurance.

    How's about ensuring the electrocution doesn't happen in the first place??

    The house is very big and very old. 3 bedroom Victorian build with very high ceilings. The wiring must be really old. The fuse box is a old style Wylex board with 3 cartridges. That is still in place now but with an RCD added.

    I've been here 10 years, my BIL bought it in 2000. No idea when it was last rewired but must 25 years or more by now. Probably at lot longer!
     
  7. MGW

    MGW Screwfix Select

    In 1966 the rules changed and lighting needed earthing, also around the same time we stopped using rubber insulated cables and went to PVC, in some cases the PVC has leached out the plasticiser and can become brittle and crack but is only a problem when disturbed, also when Ian Smith came to power there was a shortage of copper and aluminium cables were used for a few years, but in the main if wired after 1966 then likely still OK today.

    In the main we don't have problems due to no RCD, until 2008 they were only used for outside supplies, and unless your into DIY unlikely to be a problem, OK I fitted a pair of RCD's when my son became a radio ham at 14 years old, but in the main a little common sense and no really need for them.

    As you say the big problem is loss of supply, I lost 2 freezers full of food just before I moved here, when a RCD tripped, and I was not at home. This is why my house is all RCBO protected, but forcing the landlords hand seems unlikely the regulations is.
    the (iii) take account of danger that may arise from the failure of a single circuit such as a lighting circuit and (iv) reduce the possibility of unwanted tripping of RCDs due to excessive protective conductor currents produced by equipment in normal operation are the bits which seem to say more than one RCD should be used, however caravans and boats often only have one RCD, but do have a battery to work lights, but until the supply fails and you loose food, hard to complain.
     

Share This Page