Comments advice on report after having Electrical inspection

[Engineer54]

hmmm. came across a job the other week. TN-S with an earth rod as well. think i got a reading of around 0.25ohms.

Council house installations in the early 50's were quite often also given a earth rod or lattice, i know that my parents house was, as well as all the other houses on that estate and an even bigger near-by council house estate. Nothing wrong in doing the same now either, to any TN-S or TNC-S derived systems....

 

[wingers]

So you now tell us there is an immersion connected to the ring? Why is this not detailed on the PIR and given a code 4 (arguably a code 2 since there is only one ring, especially if this is your primary means of hot water)?
this needs fixing with it's own circuit. Probably less than half a day. If he was intending to do this, it really should be detailed on the PIR and quote.
At this age of property, it's also likely the immersion has no safety cut out - this is a code 2 and a new stat should be fitted (see the guides linked below)

immersion is not actually used as water is now heated by oil fired central heating - didn't even know I had an immersion until he checked electric's - as it was one of three switches I asked him to identify as was hidden in a cupboard and didn't have a clue what it was for

 

[nickblake]

With the reading of that low id have expected it to be a TNCS ,so as ive pointed out in a previouse post he has ticked both Earth rod and suppliers earth so it could be a TNCS with a Rod as has been mentioned , an old TT system that has been upgraded to TNCS and earth rod never removed , or the earth from the immersion etc causing incorrect readings , as i have said we all make mistakes ,but in correct main switch nos RCD values ,cpc sizes when there isnt one mmm way to many 1 or even 2 may be

 

[wingers]

With the reading of that low id have expected it to be a TNCS ,so as ive pointed out in a previouse post he has ticked both Earth rod and suppliers earth so it could be a TNCS with a Rod as has been mentioned , an old TT system that has been upgraded to TNCS and earth rod never removed , or the earth from the immersion etc causing incorrect readings , as i have said we all make mistakes ,but in correct main switch nos RCD values ,cpc sizes when there isnt one mmm way to many 1 or even 2 may be

I queried this and he made a mistake and has sent me an amended report with just electode ticked

 

[nickblake]

Not being funny and i hate with a passion pulling other sparks apart , but if he had made 1 mistake then he should have checked the cert over and over to ensure no other mistakes have been made then he may well have spotted the other errors that have been pointed out , like i said we all make mistakes , i have a tendancy of checking over certs after they have been sent out , and if i spot a mistake no matter how small then i will re issue the certificate as i have said its easy to over look an error or enter a number incorrectly especially if its a PC based soft ware you use to do the certs

 

[Electricalserv]

35mA RCD is my favourite.....

 

[nickblake]

I would like to know where its installed as the schedual say's its on the ring main (Sockets)as its been tested but the observations say they have no RCD protection

I do think its about time we stopped pulling the guy apart though feel sorry for him think if he's not on the forum he should be not so we can rib him but to help him and try to point him in the direction so he doesnt make any more mistakes , sound like a young inexperiance guy to me , we all need help from time to time i know i do (wife say so any way ) lol

 

[wingers]

35mA RCD is my favourite.....

can you explain the problem with this to be in terms I would understand so I can query this with him - thanks!

 

[wingers]

I would like to know where its installed as the schedual say's its on the ring main (Sockets)as its been tested but the observations say they have no RCD protection

I do think its about time we stopped pulling the guy apart though feel sorry for him think if he's not on the forum he should be not so we can rib him but to help him and try to point him in the direction so he doesnt make any more mistakes , sound like a young inexperiance guy to me , we all need help from time to time i know i do (wife say so any way ) lol

if you can tell me what I am looking for, I can advise where it is?

agreed, but will ask him to clarify some of the points, once I understand them myself a bit more and have gone through all these replies to get a list of what is wrong on report

 

[nickblake]

RCD's are 30ma not 35ma (not all of them there are other values 100ma 300ma etc ) , what i would do is take note of all the errors pointed out buy the guys and query them all

An RCD is identifiable by a small Button that says press to test on it this could be a different array of colours black red yellow blue orange , on it it should have a number or BSEN 61008 or older types BS4293 and have 30ma written on it with a current rating 60, 80 or 100 amp

 

[wingers]

RCD's are 30ma not 35ma (not all of them there are other values 100ma 300ma etc ) , what i would do is take note of all the errors pointed out buy the guys and query them all

so that is the bit on the report under title main switch or circuit breaker - where it says rated residual operating = 35 ma ?

 

[Engineer54]

So, ....When is cdw going to visit your installation, have you made arrangments with him as yet??

 

[wingers]

So, ....When is cdw going to visit your installation, have you made arrangments with him as yet??

not yet, but will certainly be doing so, so he can visit mine and mum's and quote for the work that needs doing

 

[IQ Electrical]

I've been lurking on this thread with interest, PIR's are our core business and I can tell you now that on the rare occasion that we do find a previous report, more often than not, it is of a similar standard to the one (s) in question here.

I'd probably take a good 10 seconds to see this report for what it is-incompetent, incoherent rubbish.

It's not often that I find myself disagreeing with Malcolm but in this case, I do, these are the sort of reports that we have to compete with and clients should be able to trust.

They devalue our whole industry and force prices down even though the end product bares no resemblance to what the client has paid for!

If the key word in periodic inspection reports is 'COMPETENCY' then I defy anyone on this forum to defend the competency of the inspector in question.

I'm not interested in prices of remedial works, in any industry, there will be a large difference in prices for a set task, often influenced by location and overheads amongst other things.

Yes, the 2391-10 assists in proving competency but I can tell you from our experience that passing the 2391-10 does not immediately make an inspector competent, it's just another component in the path to competency.

I've had 2391-10 electricians on PIR's looking totally dumbfounded when faced with a board full of 3871's or 3036's, 4293's etc. etc. where are these devices in the 2391-10 course?

On another thread, I said that we only use approved electricians with 2391-10 and also have a small 'test' that is based on some of the items that I've just listed above, it helps to avoid the awful situation of telling someone that they're not good enough after one shift.

The first comment that was added following that was something along the lines of 'wow, you're just domestic installers aren't you?'

I think that attitude to domestic work/inspection is one of the reasons for the subject of this thread.

 

[Des 56]

He may be typical of many, who can do a first class installation, whilst not being at the top of the class with test and inspection.
Incorrect BS numbers and anomalies regard earthing arrangements etc dont mean he doesn't come up to scratch with the installing side

Many who do a fine job and have testing experience for initial verification,they can come unstuck and show weaknesses that can be pointed at by those more experienced Pir lads that you are presently having guidance off

It is generally recognised in the industry that to carry out a Pir, requires above average knowlege of installations,those people who do it regularly have that quality or at least they should have,



Maybe a sort of general condition report that can be used by all,it could be used for domestic installations to give pointers to the client, without including an official type safety piece of paper which would be for re assurance to a third party,insurance company sale etc

It has been my contention that Pirs are open to anybody who believes they can do the work,yet they shouldn't be