Am I being pedantic?

[yellowvanman]

Did an EICR today and found that 2 weeks ago a fairly well know heater company removed a number of storage heaters and then replaced some of the DP switches with 13A sockets to plug their heaters into, plus a couple for general use!

Not a RCD in the house - all circuits on re-wireable fuses.

Changed the normal C3 for sockets not protected by a RCD to a C2!

Am I being pedantic?

 

[Midwest]

Is it not down to them to put right what they should of done in the first place. Your customer needs to get them back and put right, or take this matter further.

 

[yellowvanman]

Is it not down to them to put right what they should of done in the first place. Your customer needs to get them back and put right, or take this matter further.

As they would have to travel half way across the country they have asked me to fix, not too difficult to do.

Replace 1 gang sockets for RCD sockets or put an inline RCD for the 'off-peak' CU.

Now given all details to the customer to negiotiate a discount on his bill for the heaters!

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Did an EICR today and found that 2 weeks ago a fairly well know heater company removed a number of storage heaters and then replaced some of the DP switches with 13A sockets to plug their heaters into, plus a couple for general use!

Not a RCD in the house - all circuits on re-wireable fuses.

Changed the normal C3 for sockets not protected by a RCD to a C2!

Am I being pedantic?

I'm not sure why you consider the lack of RCD protection 'potentially dangerous'.... unless the sockets are likely to supply equipment outdoors?

 

[yellowvanman]

I'm not sure why you consider the lack of RCD protection 'potentially dangerous'.... unless the sockets are likely to supply equipment outdoors?

Because it contravenes reg 411.3.3 as it was done 2 weeks previous. i realise that there are other sockets without RCD protection in the house but they were installed before this reg was created.

 

[J.C.E]

Because it contravenes reg 411.3.3 as it was done 2 weeks previous. i realise that there are other sockets without RCD protection in the house but they were installed before this reg was created.

guessing they were not labled not for general use?
Maybe they carried out a risk assessment

 

[yellowvanman]

guessing they were not labled not for general use?
Maybe they carried out a risk assessment

Based on the fact that no Minor works certifcate was issued for some 'other' work I took an educated guess that no risk assessment had been made!

 

[davesparks]

Because it contravenes reg 411.3.3 as it was done 2 weeks previous. i realise that there are other sockets without RCD protection in the house but they were installed before this reg was created.

The age is irrelevant to the code, a lack of RCD protection is a C3 on an EICR in that situation regardless.

The fact that you can also highlight the fact that recent works do not comply is seperate to the EICR and a matter for the customer to take up with the people who did the work or trading standards etc.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Because it contravenes reg 411.3.3 as it was done 2 weeks previous. i realise that there are other sockets without RCD protection in the house but they were installed before this reg was created.

The age is irrelevant to the code, a lack of RCD protection is a C3 on an EICR in that situation regardless.

The fact that you can also highlight the fact that recent works do not comply is seperate to the EICR and a matter for the customer to take up with the people who did the work or trading standards etc.

I have to agree with davesparks against the consensus on this thread, regardless of recent changes to regulations why is a socket not likely to supply equipment outdoors and not on an RCD potentially dangerous now when it wasn't a year ago?

 

[yellowvanman]

I have to agree with davesparks against the consensus on this thread, regardless of recent changes to regulations why is a socket not likely to supply equipment outdoors and not on an RCD potentially dangerous now when it wasn't a year ago?

I accept what has been said, all I was trying to do is get the previous job done properly without the owner having to take any further expense, and I think I've been successful in that.

 

[Midwest]

Whilst an RCD can be omitted for certain labelled sockets in a domestic property (with the associated cable protection) for a specific item. My green OSG, gives an example of a socket outlet for a freezer (yellow OSG might be different). I don't think its in the spirit of the reg' for an electric heater. Risk assessments cannot be used for domestic properties.

IMO converting the DP switch to socket 'alters' the use of the circuit, and the company should be complying with BS767 current at the time. I do not do EICR's, so I'll leave you guys to argue the coding. From my post #14, you'll see it is standard practise for this company to convert a DP to a socket, and there's no caveat in their answer . Which makes me wonder how many other properties they've done a similar thing.

Personally yellowvanman, you've done your job with your EICR and I would let this company come back and put their 'lazy' work (their description) right, after all it's their boast they 'cover the whole of Britain'. Up to the customer to resolve this issue with the company, I think.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

I'd agree with everything you've done YVM....apart from the code 2. However as the company is now sorting the issue based on your assessment thats really just a technicallity.