I am a landlord and my managing estate agent just recently organised an electrician to carry out EICR. Came back as unsatisfactory, no RCD protection on: lights, smoke alarm, door bell and immersion heater. There is RCD protection on sockets and cooker. Electrician suggests changing the board. Is there an alternative eg. Adding another RCD to the current board? I was also worried that putting in a new board could cause other faults in the house that would then need remedying. House is mid 1990s construction.
-
Please checkout our new DIY Forum, and any trade that'd like to join and help out, and Contractor Talk Forum.
Discuss EICR fail: No RCD Protection for lights etc. in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
![[ElectriciansForums.net] EICR fail: No RCD Protection for lights etc.](https://electricians.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/data/attachments/70/70573-3a9ee67dd80ac3e57824b1b53bcce814.jpg)
![[ElectriciansForums.net] EICR fail: No RCD Protection for lights etc.](https://electricians.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/data/attachments/70/70574-d27d55d0d9881d225f7918b036af2f87.jpg)
A picture of your consumer unit and EICR with personal details redacted would help?
Also a CU change would not "cause" faults but simply highlight existing faults an old CU might not
You might think it is OK to leave faults in an electrical installation as long as you don't know about them because you are then forced to get them fixed which is very irresponsible and you are just leaving faults only to be discovered by your tenants which could have disastrous consequences
It is fixing these faults which could easily save someones life and it is your responsibility as a landlord to ensure your installation is safe which is the idea of an EICR
Also a CU change would not "cause" faults but simply highlight existing faults an old CU might not
You might think it is OK to leave faults in an electrical installation as long as you don't know about them because you are then forced to get them fixed which is very irresponsible and you are just leaving faults only to be discovered by your tenants which could have disastrous consequences
It is fixing these faults which could easily save someones life and it is your responsibility as a landlord to ensure your installation is safe which is the idea of an EICR
Check the report for other C1 or C2 codes.
Having no rcd on those circuits wouldn’t normally merit an unsatisfactory report but would simply be a C3: improvement recommended.
Although the electrician may code on the strict side as it’s a rental property.
Having no rcd on those circuits wouldn’t normally merit an unsatisfactory report but would simply be a C3: improvement recommended.
Although the electrician may code on the strict side as it’s a rental property.
Agree thinking C2 for cabling in walls not Rcd protection that’s the Code Breakers code though… C3?
I’ve added the consumer unit and the fails on the report, no issues with cables.
Could be, not sure.
I’ve added the photo of the consumer unit and summary of fails.
Looking at the observations....
If the existing RCD doesn't work, then I'd say that's a valid C2.
If the complaint is that all the circuits on the right have no RCD protection, then most people would judge that to be a C3 issue.
I'd suggest downloading the (free) best practise guide 4, read page 14, and ask the person who carried out the report whether there are good reasons the advice in BPG4 isn't being followed.
My informal opinion would be that there are some benefits of a board change (having lighting RCD protected so people changing bulbs have a little extra protection, having more modern Type A RCD technology, faults only taking out a single circuit, adding surge protection) but that is not the same as saying that it is potentially dangerous for the current installation to remain in service.
Can you clarify which are coded as C2 as it appears to be off the photograph.
If the existing RCD doesn't work, then I'd say that's a valid C2.
If the complaint is that all the circuits on the right have no RCD protection, then most people would judge that to be a C3 issue.
I'd suggest downloading the (free) best practise guide 4, read page 14, and ask the person who carried out the report whether there are good reasons the advice in BPG4 isn't being followed.
https://www.----------------------------/media/2149/bpg4-1.pdf
My informal opinion would be that there are some benefits of a board change (having lighting RCD protected so people changing bulbs have a little extra protection, having more modern Type A RCD technology, faults only taking out a single circuit, adding surge protection) but that is not the same as saying that it is potentially dangerous for the current installation to remain in service.
Can you clarify which are coded as C2 as it appears to be off the photograph.
Last edited:
Hi Tim, the C2s I got we’re for all the red circuits that weren’t RCD protected. There’s no more information than is on the summary page other than in the relevant section it says c2
![[ElectriciansForums.net] EICR fail: No RCD Protection for lights etc.](https://electricians.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/data/attachments/70/70578-facc6c8f86d155e544ad9e4f56e7f00e.jpg "[ElectriciansForums.net] EICR fail: No RCD Protection for lights etc.")
I've chopped off information that would identify the company and contractor.
I'm afraid there are some concerns about that schedule of test results.
There is certainly nothing on there to say the RCD works, there is no test data recorded for the RCD at all, not even that the test button works.
My top concern - there are some circuits that apparently had no R1+R2, R2 or Zs test which means there is no way of knowing that the protective device will trip under fault conditions, which is rather a fundamental aspect of testing.
My other big concern - if we believe the figures, there is one sockets circuit that has VERY low insulation resistance suggesting poor condition or damaged wiring and that would have raised concerns for me, and I'd have given that a C2.
One of two things happened. He either did an incomplete and in my opinion not very competent job, or he found enough things wrong to make it rather pointless continuing testing and stopped short.
Personally I wouldn't proceed with any recommended remedial work based on such incomplete test data.
Would you mind sharing your approximate location? There may be members nearby who can help resolve this.
Gotta love the “N/A” for number of points served.
How hard is it to count sockets?
How hard is it to count sockets?
If that really is the wiring then very worrying, but it could be the result of something like a surge-protecting extension block still being plugged in somewhere to that set of sockets. Or maybe a boiler with built-in SPD on a FCU somewhere, etc.
The lack of other info like RCD trip times, or R1+R2 on any other circuit, is not encouraging.
I think Code Breakers has C2 for anything they can possibly think of. The BPG #4 guidance seems more sane, and it is signed off by the same organisation. Go figure!
There’s another current thread that mentions with EICRs, if it complied at the time it was put in, but not now, it’s a C3….. if it never complied, then it’s the C1, C2….
Although it is down to the person doing the test at the time, and being rental, he may aim to get things changed to be safe as possible.
The faulty RCDs would of course bring a C2. Potentially dangerous. If there is a serious fault, the rcd may not trip, resulting in injury.
Although it is down to the person doing the test at the time, and being rental, he may aim to get things changed to be safe as possible.
The faulty RCDs would of course bring a C2. Potentially dangerous. If there is a serious fault, the rcd may not trip, resulting in injury.
The thing is, it should be about electrical safety for continue use, not personal preferences about installing the latest gear.
I'm with you there. The main thing this one swings on is whether that RCD works.
I'm thinking it likely that he started with sockets, then found the RCD issue. I'd have personally tested the rest anyway, as there are parts readily available for that board.
Maybe it was above five and the other hand was scratching his head.
Cardiff
In what reality is most of that NA?? Meaningless test result sheet.
Observation sheet says RCD faulty, without any indication of why, but if it is, then that's a C2, which could conceivably expand into a board change if a suitable replacement is unavailable.
Observation sheet says RCD faulty, without any indication of why, but if it is, then that's a C2, which could conceivably expand into a board change if a suitable replacement is unavailable.
I think the faulty part is that RCD protection does not exist for light, immersion, smoke alarm, doorbell. Might be wrong.
In that case the observation sheet is as ridiculous as the test results sheet.
Time to have a word with your agent, if that's the standard of testing their electrician produces.
Time to have a word with your agent, if that's the standard of testing their electrician produces.
Can you walk away from an unsatisfactory EICR if you are unhappy with its standard and start again with a different electrician. Or are you duty bound to close out the fails on first electricians test sheet.
There's no restriction on how often you can test an installation, and the one with the most recent date is the valid one.
Both socket circuits appear to have been IR tested at 500V DC. To do that, you have to be quite sure there is nothing still connected. The one with the low IR value is typical of something still connected, I noted above mention of things like an extension block, boiler, some other FCU. Testing at 500V DC (if that was actually done) rather than 250V DC risks having blown whatever was still connected up.
So if I get another electrician who goes in and finds that those RCD issues (ie no RCD cover for lights, immersion, doorbell, smoke alarm) is c3 then I don’t need to close the c2s out from the previous report. Notwithstanding I guess that he may find issues that first guy hasn’t found. What qualification should I ensure someone who carries out an EICR has?
Reply to EICR fail: No RCD Protection for lights etc. in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
Similar Threads
I think it is a good idea in general,
it provides a form of proof that the landlord has provide access to the required documents.
further to that...
- Thirst for knowledge
- Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification
- 19
- 1K
I would C2 this, cable is not suitable for the environment its installed in, we would C2 a socket for equipment likely to be used outside , cable...
- bilbo_88
- Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification
- 11
- 872
Thanks for the reply littlespark.
Yes the works have been carried out.
Surely it is fraudulent because basically the document is Not...
- sparksflying
- DIY Electrical Advice
- 2
- 557
Measuring earth leakage is not relevant, that is only relevant to actual unwanted tripping, we are not concerned with that, we are concerned with...
Easy to say but sometimes difficult to action.
don’t let the customer dictate the specifics of the job to the point where you are not happy with...
OFFICIAL SPONSORS
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
-
Song words.SOMEONE Like You - Adele View: https://youtu.be/hLQl3WQQoQ0?si=bNPukPHAGvf-wmTy- Latest: westward10
-
Electric screwdiverAnyway I gave in and bought the hikoki. Bit bigger than I was looking for but a lot of tool for...
- Latest: Teddy Lop
-
Do you need to sit 2391-52 if you have sat your ACA and are now an approved electricianhttps://sjib.org.uk/assessments-of-competence/aca/ The ACA consists of the following five...- Latest: AngelLaHash
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.