EICR - No Line or CPC Continuity on Ring | Page 2 | on ElectriciansForums

Discuss EICR - No Line or CPC Continuity on Ring in the Electrical Testing & PAT Testing Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

I disagree @Paignton pete and @buzzlightyear

This is an inspection only.

there is no further investigation required, a fault has been found in 2 conductors of a ring.
report it's condition as C2 and move on.

if it was not a ring, and the cpc was broken, It may well be a C1, no further investigation is required to find where it is broken. just report it and move on.

Obviously to fix the fault will require further investigation (AKA Fault Finding) as it has not been precisely located.
You can't report a C1 and move on you either have to fix it there and then or isolate that circuit. I have just today been to a job that someone else has inspected (eicr) and failed because there was no end to end continuity on house sockets r1 and rn but cpc was ok, I was asked to attend and fix the fault the other tester found. (I found the fault it was an incorrectly terminated spur unit) however this fault led to severe thermal damage on two of the sockets worse I have seen in a long time to be honest, back of skts melted away another day or 2 and this could of been much worse. This gave cause of concern to me as should the electrician who tested this leave the property knowing there was no continuity on the ring and knowing this can lead to excessive overload on the circuit
 

Attachments

  • [ElectriciansForums.net] EICR - No Line or CPC Continuity on Ring
    20211108_092522.jpg
    358 KB · Views: 25
You can't report a C1 and move on you either have to fix it there and then or isolate that circuit. I have just today been to a job that someone else has inspected (eicr) and failed because there was no end to end continuity on house sockets r1 and rn but cpc was ok, I was asked to attend and fix the fault the other tester found. (I found the fault it was an incorrectly terminated spur unit) however this fault led to severe thermal damage on two of the sockets worse I have seen in a long time to be honest, back of skts melted away another day or 2 and this could of been much worse. This gave cause of concern to me as should the electrician who tested this leave the property knowing there was no continuity on the ring and knowing this can lead to excessive overload on the circuit

Looks like that's had loose connections.
 
It all comes back to whether is a C1 or not.

if you deemed it to be a C1 you have to either correct it or dont re energise it.

any other code, yes report and move on. You are not there to make alterations additions or repairs. You are 5here to report on the condition of the installation at the time of testing.

obviously an FI could be an immediately dangerous situation after further investigation, but at this stage before you investigate you won’t know because you haven’t looked into the fault yet as that’s not what you are there to do.

You can’t criticise a sparky who fails to identify an immediately dangerous situation in a circuit if they have classed that circuit as FI. they have identified something is wrong but would need further investigation to know if it’s a C1 or C2.
 
Here's one I wasn't expecting on an EICR. Recently rewired and renovated 2-bed property (2015ish). Having an EICR as a new tenant to move in soon. No reported problems.

I expected to be in and out in about 3-4 hours to be honest, and as expected I found nothing wrong until I began my ring final tests. All the sockets had already tested fine during my visual check and quick test with my Kewtech tester. I was a little surprised to find this property only had the one ring with the combi boiler also hanging off it, given the board was a 10-way with 4 spare ways in it. Made me wonder why during the rewire the property wasn't split into an upstairs and downstairs ring, but anyway....

So, RN tested out fine, but R1 - open circuit, R2 - open circuit ! Oh joy. At this point the current tenant piped up and said "Should I have mentioned some of the sockets were getting hot ?!"

Anyway according to the Codebreakers guide I should be giving this a C2 (Actually I'm thinking of giving it an FI), and handing the report to the landlord. I admit I don't get many outright failures, but this one obviously is.

Anyway what I was going to ask is I'm assuming what I have here is a ring that's functioning as 2 overloaded radials, and somewhere both conductors have a break in them (It'll be just my luck that they will be in different locations). It can't be classed a C1 can it, as this fault could have been there for years, and another couple of days shouldn't hurt. What would you classify this as - C1, C2 or an FI ?
Broken ring, sockets getting hot. 20 A accessories on 32A breaker? Fire risk. F1
 
An open circuit on any conductor on a ring final circuit should attract a C2. What limitations are preventing you inspecting and testing thus giving an FI code?
The FI code is massively misunderstood and misused, it should be used when a limitation in the inspection prevents you from assessing something and where did to the limitations, you suspect danger or potential danger.
I am going to disagree and advise that you should base the answer on your findings as your initially there to carry out a condition report. If you test a circuit and find there is no conrinuity of CPC and the problem is not starimg you in the face, then you write down FI in order to advise the client as per your findings. If you see a break in cable and again your remit is to report findings then you add C2 to the report. If however, your remit is to report and resolve then you write the code that applies. There is no science and secret behind codes. The issue is people reading too much into a simple task. C1 dangerous, C2 is potentially dangerous, C3 advisory and FI further investigation to determine result.
 
I am going to disagree and advise that you should base the answer on your findings as your initially there to carry out a condition report. If you test a circuit and find there is no conrinuity of CPC and the problem is not starimg you in the face, then you write down FI in order to advise the client as per your findings. If you see a break in cable and again your remit is to report findings then you add C2 to the report. If however, your remit is to report and resolve then you write the code that applies. There is no science and secret behind codes. The issue is people reading too much into a simple task. C1 dangerous, C2 is potentially dangerous, C3 advisory and FI further investigation to determine result.
I disagree, if open circuit has been confirmed on RFC then rectification is the next step not FI surely.?
 
I am going to disagree and advise that you should base the answer on your findings as your initially there to carry out a condition report. If you test a circuit and find there is no conrinuity of CPC and the problem is not starimg you in the face, then you write down FI in order to advise the client as per your findings. If you see a break in cable and again your remit is to report findings then you add C2 to the report. If however, your remit is to report and resolve then you write the code that applies. There is no science and secret behind codes. The issue is people reading too much into a simple task. C1 dangerous, C2 is potentially dangerous, C3 advisory and FI further investigation to determine result.

The answer is in the last two letters of the acronym 'EICR'. If you're tasked with repairing anything you find, then any issues you resolved won't be coded - if you find a fault and can't repair it, then you report on the condition of the installation at the time of writing.
 
The answer is in the last two letters of the acronym 'EICR'. If you're tasked with repairing anything you find, then any issues you resolved won't be coded - if you find a fault and can't repair it, then you report on the condition of the installation at the time of writing.
Exactly! Repairs are not in the remit of an EICR, although myself and most others will deal with very simple faults to repair as they go. Bit like the MOT test for your car, when the tester sticks on a new wiper blade or changes a brake light lamp to avoid failing the car.
 
my garage issue a fail cert for a faulty lamp
even though i tell them if it needs lamps or brake pads etc, just to do it and send me the bill.

normally i get
fail cert
invoice for number plate lamp etc.
pass cert

i suppose it is the correct way of doing it and also stops the garage from having an unusual pass/fail ratio that might lead them to being checked for irregular practices.

edit, that leads me on to, why dont the part p scams, keep an eye on members that have unusual ratio's of satisfactory vs unsatisfactory eicr's and look closely at the ones who are passing nearly 100% of certificates issued?
 

Reply to EICR - No Line or CPC Continuity on Ring in the Electrical Testing & PAT Testing Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Similar Threads

  • Question
As previously posted, almost certainly due to differences in readings obtsined with high and low current measurements on the meter, low current...
Replies
10
Views
1K
OLDBOY
O
Definitely, although most likely within the accessories. I've often found that once accessories are disconnected the cabling IR is fine. Sometimes...
Replies
19
Views
2K
This fella puts his face to it about halfway through, he has an opinion on the very subject.
Replies
42
Views
3K
  • Question
If they got a shock then something cannot have been isolated.
Replies
7
Views
1K

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
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks