Test failed due to missing RCD | Page 8 | on ElectriciansForums

Discuss Test failed due to missing RCD in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
14
Reaction score
9
Location
Hornchurch
Hi All
Recently joined the forum to ask for some information.
I recently bought a flat to let. I was advised by the letting agent to get the electrics tested, although not a legal requirement. The test was carried out by their electrical contractor. He failed the test due to the fuse board not having an RCD fitted. The fuse board is the original board fitted in 2003 when the flats where built. There has been no mods or circuits added to the system and everything is working as it should. I paid £348.00 for the test and the RCD to be installed. I have since been told that the test should not have failed due to the lack of the RCD. Have I been stitched up.
Any comments gratefully recieved

Peter
 
What have people got against CU's with only 1 RCD... Some are making it sound like they trip every month....
How many people on here have a CU with just 1 RCD? How long has it been since it tripped? Mine has been quite a bit. A few years. When the daughter knocked her drink over which was above a socket..
 
What have people got against CU's with only 1 RCD... Some are making it sound like they trip every month....
How many people on here have a CU with just 1 RCD? How long has it been since it tripped? Mine has been quite a bit. A few years. When the daughter knocked her drink over which was above a socket..
It’s just that it’s poor design and doesn’t comply with BS7671.
 
My interpretation from what you have said is that not having an RCD in the fuse board is an advisory not a fail
Notwithstanding the fact that I haven't seen the installation in question I would almost certainly have issued an Unsatisfactory assessment in the absence of any 30mA RCD.
 
My understanding, is that installations which complied at the time of design/construction but do not comply with current editions do not require upgrading.
As such anything that complied at the time of design/construction should only warrant a code C3.
As RCD protection for sockets which would reasonably be expected to supply portable equipment used outdoors was a requirement of both the 15th and 16th editions, it is unlikely that an external non RCD protected socket complied.

In such a situation I would use code C2 for all instances where RCD protection is now required.
Rubbish. What about fused neutrals which complied when installed?
 
You can’t be saying that you would only C3 an installation which employed a fused neutral as part of its fault protection?
However rare this might be.
As far as I am aware, BS7671 has only ever allowed single pole switches, circuit breakers and fuses to be installed in A.C. line conductors, and prohibits any such device (unless linked to all other live conductors) from being installed in earthed A.C. Neutral conductors.
I cannot imagine applying a code C3, it would either be a code C2 or no code at all.
 
Actually found this a couple of weeks ago and I thought it was dead until a time clock kicked in and livened it up. Does some external Christmas lighting supplies.
[ElectriciansForums.net] Test failed due to missing RCD
 
Look it is like this - it probably did meet requirements at the time. Whether it does now or not maybe be the subject of debate, however, for your own and more importantly your tenant's safety fitting one would be a good idea, and not expensive, as you have seen. Do you know what one does? Like I said before the spark has probably been in this situation loads of times before and been completely ignored by penny pinching landlords. Or, there may also be a good reason, so if I were you I would just crack on. He has not taken the mick with his price, IMO. Who was it told you that it should not have failed anyway? Have they been to the installation and done another EICR??

It is this type of lazy approach to sparking that bothers me. Itnis not a given fact that just installing RCDs ‘make it safer’.

The ‘RCD everything’ approach without no design or thought behind it is not what we ahould be doing. We could just say ‘wire everything in SWA makes it safer’. Why do we not do this? Because we need to ise our skill and interpretation to determine if these extra precautions are actually needed.

In this instance a safe installation has been made less safe by installing an ‘up-front’ RCD which is not to Regs.
 

Reply to Test failed due to missing RCD in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

News and Offers from Sponsors

  • Article
Join us at electronica 2024 in Munich! Since 1964, electronica has been the premier event for technology enthusiasts and industry professionals...
    • Like
Replies
0
Views
265
  • Sticky
  • Article
Good to know thanks, one can never have enough places to source parts from!
Replies
4
Views
756
  • Article
OFFICIAL SPONSORS These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then...
Replies
0
Views
746

Similar threads

L
  • Question
My Understanding is the 6 Months interval is IET Guidance and this wording is incorporated onto the label which is a requirement in 514.12.2 where...
Replies
9
Views
641
I usually put something like this To assess compliance with BS7671 for continued safe operation (5 year periodical inspection)
Replies
8
Views
438

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

YOUR Unread Posts

This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top