C3s putting you in harms way ??

[LastManOnline]

I presume you hadn't many issues with MICA in Kerry? Big issue around Donegal with Cassidy's in Buncrana supplying affected blocks for years. Unbelievable cracking as a result.

No. Have, nt heard it hear locally. Sounds bad

 

[LastManOnline]

Is the conduit in the concrete plastic or steel?

Plastic

 

[UNG]

Which says what about how to code non-conformances?

So how many companies or people would you give 20 quid to for their generic opinions on coding a generic issue and what legal standing would any of them have

Given that BS7671 is the reference book we all work to and is the recognised standard I think any non conformances would be judged against that not some book of generic opinions of which even the contributors seem to have differing opinions when you speak to them

It seems that these days the lack of qualifications, skill and experience has to be supported by these assistive generic documents what happened to being suitably qualified, skilled and experienced for the task in hand and being able to make the informed decision when needed

 

[Soi disant]

Fusebox F2010MX 10 Way SPD Metal Consumer Unit with 10 Mini A Rated DP RCBOs | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Fusebox F2010MX 10 Way SPD Metal Consumer Unit with 10 Mini A Rated DP RCBOs at the best online prices at eBay! Free delivery for many products.

www.ebay.co.uk

So how much are single-module RCBOs with AFD?

 

[Soi disant]

So how many companies or people would you give 20 quid to for their generic opinions on coding a generic issue and what legal standing would any of them have

Given that BS7671 is the reference book we all work to and is the recognised standard I think any non conformances would be judged against that not some book of generic opinions of which even the contributors seem to have differing opinions when you speak to them

Which says what about how to code non-conformances?

Not identify whether something is a non-conformance or not, what do the Wiring Regulations say about what code to give any non-conformance?

 

[Mike Johnson]

I often say to others, do some work for yourself for a change, if you want to know something look it up.

 

[Soi disant]

I often say to others, do some work for yourself for a change, if you want to know something look it up.

I think you've completely failed to realise why I'm asking the question.

UNG keeps saying that things should be coded on the basis of what BS 7671 says, not what a publication from NICEIC/NAPIT/et al says.

So I'm asking him what the Wiring Regulations say about what code to give any non-conformance?

 

[UNG]

Not identify whether something is a non-conformance or not, what do the Wiring Regulations say about what code to give any non-conformance?

Did you actually read ALL of my post and did you actually digest any of it before you responded.

Why are you so insistent that the gospels according to NAPIT and / or the NICEIC is law' they are full of generic circumstances with generic codings that in the case of codebreakers even the contributors can agree on

There is no substitute for proper qualifications, the appropriate skill set and EXPERIENCE when it comes down to making the decision at the coalface for what coding is needed for a non compliance with BS7671. If you are not able to do that then IMO you should not be doing EICR's, back when I did the 2391 the book you needed was the current BS7671 to make that informed decision not a load of dodgy money making publications

To be honest the biggest non compliance currently is the lack of proper training or the task in hand which should be coded as a C1+++

 

[westward10]

I think you've completely failed to realise why I'm asking the question.

UNG keeps saying that things should be coded on the basis of what BS 7671 says, not what a publication from NICEIC/NAPIT/et al says.

So I'm asking him what the Wiring Regulations say about what code to give any non-conformance?

BS7671 only gives one suggestion for a Code and that is a minimum Code 3 for lack of additional rcd protection.

 

[Lister1987]

I think you've completely failed to realise why I'm asking the question.

UNG keeps saying that things should be coded on the basis of what BS 7671 says, not what a publication from NICEIC/NAPIT/et al says.

So I'm asking him what the Wiring Regulations say about what code to give any non-conformance?

Profile has you down as a Domestic Installer, have you got any test & inspect/EICR experience?

Think about the codes and what they mean (don't have my book so can't quote word for word);

C1 - Immediately dangerous, should be rectified immediately or at least made safe (which would then (possibly) knock down to a C2) - I can see it, I can touch it, it will kill me now

C2 - Potentially dangerous, has the potential to elevate to a C1 dependant on external influences - Something has to happen to elevate to a C1 - Remedial as soon as practicable

C3 - Non-compliance but not dangerous

Now think about what things you're likely to find.

Exposed live parts; C1 every day of the week.

Underrated OCPD; C2, which you cant die from touching it, continued use would give rise to danger

Plastic CU with no thermal damage; C3, nothing to indicate the switchgear isn't operating at intended but current regs would want a non flame propogating ferrous metal enclosure.

You get the idea, it's all down to engineering judgement, not what advise guides like Codebreakers et all day.

 

[telectrix]

Profile has you down as a Domestic Installer, have you got any test & inspect/EICR experience?

Think about the codes and what they mean (don't have my book so can't quote word for word);

C1 - Immediately dangerous, should be rectified immediately or at least made safe (which would then (possibly) knock down to a C2) - I can see it, I can touch it, it will kill me now

C2 - Potentially dangerous, has the potential to elevate to a C1 dependant on external influences - Something has to happen to elevate to a C1 - Remedial as soon as practicable

C3 - Non-compliance but not dangerous

Now think about what things you're likely to find.

Exposed live parts; C1 every day of the week.

Underrated OCPD; C2, which you cant die from touching it, continued use would give rise to danger

Plastic CU with no thermal damage; C3, nothing to indicate the switchgear isn't operating at intended but current regs would want a non flame propogating ferrous metal enclosure.

You get the idea, it's all down to engineering judgement, not what advise guides like Codebreakers et all day.

agreed, but BS 7671 does not give us the approriate codes for different situations. the actual code classifications are in guidance notes and best practice giude. this is where individual inspectors may differ over codes. usually between C2 and C3. what 1 guy may see as a potential danger, another may just think improvement recommended. err on the side of caution, you are accused of making up work. be lenient and a resulting fire or injury, it's yous in the dock. in the light of the dark side. we're the front line expendables. only the lawyers win, even if they lose, they get paid 10 x our charges. any 5 week law courses about?

 

[brianmoooore]

it's all down to engineering judgement

 

[UNG]

Underrated OCPD; C2, which you cant die from touching it, continued use would give rise to danger

Do you mean an over rated OCPD which could be dangerous if the circuit is overloaded, all an under rated OCPD would do is trip

Plastic CU with no thermal damage; C3, nothing to indicate the switchgear isn't operating at intended but current regs would want a non flame propogating ferrous metal enclosure.

Current regulations require a non combustible CU or a CU contained within a fire rated enclosure, E.G. metal is only an example and not an absolute requirement when it comes to the construction of a CU

 

[Soi disant]

Did you actually read ALL of my post and did you actually digest any of it before you responded.

Yes and yes.

Why are you so insistent that the gospels according to NAPIT and / or the NICEIC is law'

Please show where I've even suggested that I am.

There is no substitute for proper qualifications, the appropriate skill set and EXPERIENCE when it comes down to making the decision at the coalface for what coding is needed for a non compliance with BS7671. If you are not able to do that then IMO you should not be doing EICR's,

That's all true, but you were arguing against the use of best practice guides issued by officially recognised organisers of competent person schemes, saying that non-conformances should only be judged against the wiring regs, so it seemed reasonable to consider the fact that those contain effectively nothing in the way of guidance on codings.

Perhaps if you'd said at the outset that the substitute for scheme BPGs is proper qualifications, the appropriate skill set and experience, not BS 7671?

However, you are ignoring the fact that virtually every industry and profession has defined best practices, and the fact that as soon as it's made legally mandatory for non-conformances to be rectified, and made a criminal offence to fail to do so, we really should strive to have a system where non-conformances are coded consistently, day in, day out, from one end of the country to another.

If you think about it, BS 7671 is nothing but a large best practice guide for how electrical installations shall be designed and constructed, and I don't see people saying that we shouldn't have it, that we should just rely on people who carry out design and construction etc having proper qualifications, the appropriate skill set and experience.

There is much that is unsatisfactory about the present situation, such as different BPGs giving different guidance, but there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the idea of having them

 

[Soi disant]

Plastic CU with no thermal damage; C3, nothing to indicate the switchgear isn't operating at intended but current regs would want a non flame propogating ferrous metal enclosure.

You get the idea, it's all down to engineering judgement, not what advise guides like Codebreakers et all day.

And if, after some incompetent fiddling which can never be proved, that plastic CU catches fire, I wish you every luck in defending how your qualifications, skills and experience justified you ignoring what officially recognised competency organisations advised.