Absence of RCD - C2 and unsatisfactory EICR

[sarah_b]

Hello, I was hoping someone could give a bit of advice because I've received the report back from the EICR I had carried out for my 1 bed flat and it's been rated as unsatisfactory due to a lack of RCD. I was going to just look into buying a new unit as advised because we're on a really tight budget and timeframe to try and get the sale of the flat through, but I've also been reading that no RCD shouldn't necessarily mean a fail. The unit is very old though so it may be that it report is correct but I'd really appreciate a bit of advice to make sure I'm not spending hundreds on a new unit for no reason. If I upload the report would someone be able to help? Thank you

 

[buzzlightyear]

The person buying the flat is asking for the report, and I'm sure if we share this, they're going to be concerned about the safety. Do I probably need to pay for a new report with a different electrician? I'll try going back to the person who did this one first, but I imagine he wouldn't change a report after completing it?

me if it was me selling the flat ,i would not do a test on it ,sold has seen ,tell the other people if they want done then it be down to them . there is no law in the land they can make do it .
plus if that work has been done regarding a consumer change or other work under part p .

 

[neon1991]

just dont give the buyers that jokers number

 

[sarah_b]

Thank you so much everyone for your help. After a few emails back and forth and me quoting the Best Practice Guide, the electrician has agreed to complete a new report and mark the absence of RCD as C3. He originally said he wouldn't change it but said I could have a refund which I didn't feel comfortable with as he'd carried out the work, but he has now agreed to provide an updated report, so hopefully will get that through in the next couple of days.

 

[DPG]

Good to hear it. Thanks for letting us know. Hopefully it's been an educational experience for the sparky too.

 

[UNG]

That report looks like it was written by a worm crawling across the form

 

[ipf]

That report looks like it was written by a worm crawling across the forum

We're getting a few more of 'em.

 

[freddo]

Did anyone else look through the check list? So many errors in there, defects coded that don't appear to be relevant to the installation. Errors all over the place, no mention on the list about all the other C2 and C3 defects found! He has the main switch for the installation as the RCD so I assume the 3 heaters are fed from an off peak supply? Earth electrode ticked as ok but the installation has no earth electrode, but then he's ticked he's tested earth electrode Ra. Not forgetting he's also ticked that he's tested the insulation of non-conducting floors and walls! I really can't imagine the test dude taking floor and wall test plates to a domestic EICR.

C2 code for RCDs provided for fault and fire protection?! C3 for missing alternative supply warning label but page 3 says there is only 1 supply. C3 for missing replacement next inspection recommendation label, surely he should be fitting that?! He has also ticked all of section 4 it's highly likely all of those should be marked N/A, especially as several of those are not permitted in domestic installations. He has also ticked adequacy of reduced low voltage source, not something normally found in the average home! There are also gaps with nothing entered, if these weren't checked for whatever reason, impractical to verify, limited access etc. they should have been marked as not verified. And several others... I like the 9 week retest period, presumably to return to inspect/test the installation properly.

My QS would kick my head in if I turned in a certificate like this.

 

[Vortigern]

Bit of a problem with the max demand and main fuse....

 

[Questforknowledge]

It appears your socket circuits are rcd protected and its the heaters that are not...these would be a c3 at the most...c2 for lack of rcd protection would usually stem from sockets that are likely to be used outdoors e.g a ground floor socket. The document itself seems very untidy and almost unreadable, he noted the main fuses as a type 2 1361 fuse with a breaking capacity of 30kA but I believe these are 33kA. He has also noted down limitations on the report for the heater readings but I don't see a related comment within the limitations section at the beginning of the report and he has said that limitations have been agreed with the client...only you know id this is true and agreed...

Overall I'd argue observations don't appear to be correctly coded and it would be wise to get it tested by someone else and the generally poor quality in terms of presentation is not a great sign

 

[NellyManjaro]

.