Are all EV charge point installers this bad?

[catdog1121]

So I am a fully qualified spark with my own company, however I also have a few properties I rent out. One of my tenants asked if they can have an EV charge point put on the house paid for by his company, being the good landlord I said of course no problem just let me know when they are there so I can check they are going to do it right.... So the company employed was Pod point...

Guy turns up, first thing I ask is Do you know its a looped supply? He looks at it and says, "umm well I don't think it is", I said "No I know its a looped supply, I have checked with next door and although there is only one cable coming in here there is two in the neighbours", I then showed him WPD map of the property showing the power cable, I had checked with WPD and they can give permission to install one and unloop it at a later date. He got a bit flustered and said he might not be able to install it then (So he shouldn't install it but was going to anyway), I asked if the paperwork had been sent to WPD, and fair enough he didnt know and would check before installing.

I then ask him what his plan is, he wanted to split the tail and fit a new CU in the meter cupboard, I told him the meter cupboard was for electricity supplier, you can put a meter in there, an isolator, hell even henly blocks I think is ok, but not a consumer unit, he then tried to tell me E-on had given them permission, I said what about WPD and what if the tenant changes supplier and quoted from the efixx video the response from the ENA who basically said no, he insisted they have fitted loads and they are allowed, I then said well your not fitting it there, but gave him another option which was feed off the current CU a 40A non rcd circuit and put their new CU next to the existing one from that, to which he said they can't really touch existing installations, unless it is easier and has type A RCD's. I said its ok, I have the correct bus bars and a 40A mcb for that CU and ill even do the work, he then said this was ok..

I move on to ask him will the new CU come with an SPD? (Current install does not have an SPD and although I know I am being picky a new circuit I was told by both NAPIT and IET you have to fit an SPD), he said nope we don't bother fitting SPD's, he had checked before and higher ups had said if you want an SPD then you need to find a local sparkie to fit one. I said ok ill take it up with pod point, the guy then waited for ages and could not get hold of his company to find out if it was ok to install so I phoned my contact in WPD who checked and said there was no paperwork for the install so they had not gained permission.. So the install got delayed.

I had a look online and pod points install instructions suggest they you should have an SPD at the source of the installation, I phoned up and they confirmed they were installing to BS7671 amendment 2 so I quoted regulation 443.4.1 which states that protection for transient voltage for indirect lighting strike shall be provided unless the owner refuses, and stated it even said in their own literature that they recommend one is fitted so why are they not installing, the result I got to was they install it to their standards only and its their interpretation...

I know I am being a bit pedantic as the current installation does not have an SPD but I plan to change the consumer unit in the property have some renovations when the current tenant moves out, and it might even be a complete rewire and I might move the current CU, but the EV charger CU I might just split the tails to keep that in the current position so an SPD would be a good idea...

I am appalled by pod point, first the guy almost installed on a looped supply without first checking, second they want to install in the meter cupboard and thirdly they don't fit SPD's despite them recommending them and it now being a mandatory device, how do they get away with it? I have made a complaint to the NICEIC although I doubt they will do much, failing that I might let them install it then do an EICR afterwards as the guy didnt fill me with confidence when I asked him to provide me with the EIC and building compliance certificate as its a rented property its an EIC will cover that part for 5yrs, he just said "Oh its ok ill test it". I think if it doesnt have an SPD I will deem it unsatisfactory and disconnect it and send the report to the tenants company for them to engage pod point to come and rectify the situation.

Years ago I wanted to get into the EV install market but it was after looking at pod points prices where it was only about £200 more than the unit to have it installed I worked out the costs and the materials were close to that alone so I would make no money, now I know why they can install so cheaply..

Would be interested in what others think... (Have to admit I was a bit ranty, for the average joe they don't have a clue).

 

[DPG]

In what circumstances does the DNO own the meter box? It is normally owned by the consumer

And good luck to Johnny gogo gadget pursuing a claim against electrician that failed to recommend SPD....that's just not going to happen.

It doesn't mean you shouldn't advise the homeowner about SPDs though. And to be honest the outlay is minimal these days for a consumer unit with SPD fitted.

 

[slartybartfast]

wner about SPDs tho

It doesn't mean you shouldn't advise the homeowner about SPDs though. And to be honest the outlay is minimal these days for a consumer unit with SPD fitted.

There is a huge big difference between optional. recommended & mandatory. SPDs remain purely optional and are only relevant based on a risk assessment.

In this country, surge risk remains extremely low, is completely overrated, and protection is by and large completely unnecessary.

Generally speaking sensitive equipment is covered by warranty, and of course an EV could well be driven out of the Uk to a country with high surge risk and low adoption of SPDs.

Yes an out of warranty Tesla could get fried in event of a surge. However probably of surge is low, and impact of surge is dependant on home owners view on money. The likelyhood is that the risk would be determined as low.

Granted a £60 - £80 single phase SPD is somewhat lost in cost of a new consumer unit but that is not the point.

 

[DPG]

There is a huge big difference between optional. recommended & mandatory. SPDs remain purely optional and are only relevant based on a risk assessment.

In this country, surge risk remains extremely low, is completely overrated, and protection is by and large completely unnecessary.

Generally speaking sensitive equipment is covered by warranty, and of course an EV could well be driven out of the Uk to a country with high surge risk and low adoption of SPDs.

Yes an out of warranty Tesla could get fried in event of a surge. However probably of surge is low, and impact of surge is dependant on home owners view on money. The likelyhood is that the risk would be determined as low.

Granted a £60 - £80 single phase SPD is somewhat lost in cost of a new consumer unit but that is not the point.

If you would sooner advise people to make warranty claims for any damaged equipment rather than spend a one-off £60 then fair enough.

I personally would prefer that every new CU had an SPD fitted.

 

[slartybartfast]

If you would sooner advise people to make warranty claims for any damaged equipment rather than spend a one-off £60 then fair enough.

I personally would prefer that every new CU had an SPD fitted.

Yes. I personally went through a re-wire and new CU recently (post amendment 2). Made conscious decision that SPD was BS !

 

[DPG]

Yes. I personally went through a re-wire and new CU recently (post amendment 2). Made conscious decision that SPD was BS !

And that is your choice. No problem

 

[mainline]

A couple of things.

Firstly the efixx video about putting equipment in meterbox that says you cannot do it is wrong and misleading. There is no legislation that prohibits you putting equipment inside the meterbox. Now if there is a space issue in future, then that's a conversation between consumer, retailer and the DNO, however that will be extremely unlikely. After all, older properties don't have a meter box - its normally in a cupboard somewhere, rammed with other stuff and limited spare space.

Secondly SPDs are not mandatory. The regs basically say they are advisory on basis of a risk assessment. My view on SPDs is quite simple - have managed for years without surges and the need for protection from them. If one happens, will take it on the chin, and will claim off warranties (e.g. EV manufacturer, laptop manufacturer etc) in the unlikely event that a surge occurs. There is so much BS and confusion around SPDs and it pains me that electricians dont really understand the need and then do the hard sell on the consumer.

Back last week, 8 people in the same street had dead boilers due to a surge.

I got told because the elderly couple I did a board for had SPD, I guess it was just luck that theirs was fine.

 

[mainline]

SPDs are not mandatory. The regs basically say they are advisory on basis of a risk assessment.

SPDs are required to be fitted where transient overvoltage may cause serious injury to, or loss of, human life.

Surge protection is required to be fitted where overvoltage may cause a failure of a safety service. This could be a fire alarm, automated fire sprinklers, or even emergency lighting.


If anything that is considered a safety service, or a circuit supplying such a service, and it will be negatively impacted by overvoltage, it must now have an SPD fitted.

Responsibility is given to the appropriate British Standard regulations for the following:

• Emergency Lighting systems – Regulation 560.9
• Fire Detection systems – Regulation 560.10
• Life safety & fire fighting – Regulation 560.11

Significant data loss could easily occur in a modern household where computers and mobile devices are present. If these are plugged in at the time of a serious overvoltage, they could easily be damaged, causing data loss.

As an absolute minimum, expect this to apply to mandatory fitting of SPDs in the instance of offices and other areas where there are lots of computers. Again, it would be wise to approach this with a ‘best practise’ attitude and just fit the SPD for the low cost of them.

 

[slartybartfast]

SPDs are required to be fitted where transient overvoltage may cause serious injury to, or loss of, human life.

Surge protection is required to be fitted where overvoltage may cause a failure of a safety service. This could be a fire alarm, automated fire sprinklers, or even emergency lighting.


If anything that is considered a safety service, or a circuit supplying such a service, and it will be negatively impacted by overvoltage, it must now have an SPD fitted.

Responsibility is given to the appropriate British Standard regulations for the following:

• Emergency Lighting systems – Regulation 560.9
• Fire Detection systems – Regulation 560.10
• Life safety & fire fighting – Regulation 560.11

Significant data loss could easily occur in a modern household where computers and mobile devices are present. If these are plugged in at the time of a serious overvoltage, they could easily be damaged, causing data loss.

As an absolute minimum, expect this to apply to mandatory fitting of SPDs in the instance of offices and other areas where there are lots of computers. Again, it would be wise to approach this with a ‘best practise’ attitude and just fit the SPD for the low cost of them.

People need to back up their data on computers, phones etc. The loss of data angle is rather tenuous with common place cloud backup. Don't rely on surge protection.

 

[mainline]

People need to back up their data on computers, phones etc. The loss of data angle is rather tenuous with common place cloud backup. Don't rely on surge protection

What about medical ? Emergency lighting, Alarms ?.

 

[mainline]

SPDs are not mandatory. The regs basically say they are advisory on basis of a risk assessment.

Starting to remind me of that game show.
Pointless

 

[slartybartfast]

What about medical ? Emergency lighting, Alarms ?.

I can see that there is an argument for SPD on say, mains powered linked smoke alarms (and medical, alarms etc). But you are far more likely to have a power failure which renders smoke alarm system inoperable than you are a surge. So for the SPD requirement to make sense, a UPS needs to be mandated. Mission critical systems always have a UPS and just putting an SPD on is a waste. That of course will come in later iterations of the regs....but for now it ain't there !

 

[nicebutdim]

I can see that there is an argument for SPD on say, mains powered linked smoke alarms (and medical, alarms etc). But you are far more likely to have a power failure which renders smoke alarm system inoperable than you are a surge. So for the SPD requirement to make sense, a UPS needs to be mandated. Mission critical systems always have a UPS and just putting an SPD on is a waste. That of course will come in later iterations of the regs....but for now it ain't there !

If you don't mind my asking - what edition of BS7671 are you referencing?

The problem for electricians is that, while many domestic installations may not benefit much from the addition of surge protection, its omission is no longer a matter that can be settled by a customer simply declining the option and now requires a risk assessment. A comprehensive risk assessment takes a significant amount of time, for which the designer will receive no compensation, whereas inclusion of surge protection adds minimal cost to an installation. If you were designing installations, would you take the time to write up a risk assessment for every individual, in many cases finding yourself unable to remove the requirement of surge protection, or would you include it as part of the specification and save yourself considerable hours of unpaid work?

 

[slartybartfast]

If you don't mind my asking - what edition of BS7671 are you referencing?

The problem for electricians is that, while many domestic installations may not benefit much from the addition of surge protection, its omission is no longer a matter that can be settled by a customer simply declining the option and now requires a risk assessment. A comprehensive risk assessment takes a significant amount of time, for which the designer will receive no compensation, whereas inclusion of surge protection adds minimal cost to an installation. If you were designing installations, would you take the time to write up a risk assessment for every individual, in many cases finding yourself unable to remove the requirement of surge protection, or would you include it as part of the specification and save yourself considerable hours of unpaid work?

Such a risk assessment is super easy and super quick.

 

[nicebutdim]

Such a risk assessment is super easy and super quick.

I can provide a risk assessment for anything within minutes, but producing one tailored to a particular installation that meets regulatory requirements and would stand up to legal scrutiny is another proposition entirely.

You didn't mention which edition of BS7671 you have referenced in previous comments.

 

[loz2754]

The risk assessment has been removed in BS7671 for SPDs. Amendment 2.