C2 for no isolater before CU

[plugsandsparks]

Hi guys, just picked up a set of remedials and the tester has listed a C2 for no isolater between meter tails and CU.
It is a commercial building.

I am due to quote for said remedials but obviously fitting several isolaters is going to involve DNO.

I know they are desirebale but are they really a C2 when you can isolate at CU for ordinary persons ?

 

[Guest55]

If each CU / DB has its own main switch then no defect code at all.
the inspection has been done by a clown.

 

[plugsandsparks]

NIC company based down south, been quite generous in a number of other areas but got fixated on isolation before the CUs, no long lengths of tails or anything. I know its nice to have when changing said CU but cannot find a reg to back up the C2.
Also before i go in all high and mighty just thought i would check

 

[Deleted member 26818]

The Regulations require that every installation has a main linked switch as near as practicable to the origin of the installation Regulation 537.1.4.
As for it being a code C2, that's for the inspector to decide.

 

[plugsandsparks]

Yep, seen that, thought that was the isolater (main switch) in CU

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Yes it could be an isolator in the CU.
How many CUs are there, and would operating the isolator in one CU also isolate the other CUs?

 

[Danspark]

A clown or not, he has been assessed as competent and has made that call. The premises have had a report carried out and it will only become satisfactory when it has an accompanying certificate relating to the reports recommendations. Its all chargeable work for you.

 

[plugsandsparks]

Well, there are about 8 CUs over 3 sites. One CU (DB2) is a sub-main off another CU (DB1) and he has C2 the sub DB as the MCB in DB1 is just a single pole.

Other DBs he has just said that there is no means of isolating the DB. Of course all the circuits can be isolated by ordinary persons by simply knocking off the main switch.

 

[Guest55]

I doubt its covered by bs 7671
however the ESC definition of code 2 defect ;

Potentially Dangerous , a deficiency that can become a real and immediate danger
such as missing earthing or undersized conductors.
where is the danger from not having a switch placed inbetween a fuse and another switch ?

 

[plugsandsparks]

A clown or not, he has been assessed as competent and has made that call. The premises have had a report carried out and it will only become satisfactory when it has an accompanying certificate relating to the reports recommendations. Its all chargeable work for you.

I know and i can take advantage of this testers remedials. I need to assess how the clients feels about it really. Dont get me wrong the place is a mish mash of circuits and DBs - I was surprised the list was as small as it was.

 

[plugsandsparks]

I doubt its covered by bs 7671
however the ESC definition of code 2 defect ;

Potentially Dangerous , a deficiency that can become a real and immediate danger
such as missing earthing or undersized conductors.
where is the danger from not having a switch placed inbetween a fuse and another switch ?

I agree, i could understand it if the CU is some distance away from the incoming head and as such you would want a Fused isolater but its just like my house and loads of installs i have come across where it goes meter tails direct to CU.

 

[Danspark]

I hate testing bad installations with passion. Good luck with the repairs.

 

[Guest55]

I hate testing bad installations with passion. Good luck with the repairs.

The original inspector sounds worse than the installation.
;-)

 

[needasparks]

The Regulations require that every installation has a main linked switch as near as practicable to the origin of the installation Regulation 537.1.4.
As for it being a code C2, that's for the inspector to decide.

I think thats where it falls down and can be a grey area, so many people throw additional boards in and all will say MAIN SWITCH so the untrained person may assume. Whereby many get away with just using a henley in a domestic a comm/ind site has to be viewed with an HSE hat on.
Agree with spin, it has to be a judgement call at the time as to what your confronted with and what information is visable with regards to isolation for the untrained persons.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Where a second CU is fed from another CU, the isolator in the first CU is taken as the main linked switch.
Where there are two CUs fed from the same point, a switch should be positioned so that it will isolate both CUs.
Where you have a site with many CUs spread over a number of locations, it then becomes a bit fudged.
If all the CUs are considered to be part of a single installation, then there should be just the one main switch to isolate all of them.
However if some of the CUs are considered to be in separate installations, then you would need a main switch for each installation, which could be in the CU.

It does sound as if the Inspector may well have got it wrong, at least with regards to the second CU being fed by the first.
As for the rest, without seeing the site, I can't really comment.
I'll leave you to decide whether they are separate installations, or part of the one large installation.