EICR - Code 1 or 2 - for unenclosed conductors in choc-blocs?

[Marcus Vaughan]

Hi all,

I've got a couple of examples of this;

on a domestic EICR.

I'm on the fence with the coding - C1 or C2. There is no copper showing on the live parts - but I wouldn't like to grab it.

I just want to be consistent with this - I mean if it was just bare conductors twisted together then definitely C1 - but if in a choc-bloc?

I'd be interested to know how others would code it.

 

[The Flyinhos]

Been thinking of purchasing that book myself, I’m a Napit member so it’s relevant..
Possibly not suitable for those who are members of different schemes though as it may conflict with their views on different codes?

I'm not a NAPIT member, I'm in ECA. The way I see it is that every situation is different, but this book is a very good baseline to work from. It is ultimately the inspectors professional opinion. The subject has always been a sticky wicket as the only standard on EICR reporting really was the Electrical Safety First Best Practice Guide No 4. Though quite good doesn't go into detail as much s the Codbreakers book does.
Best practice guide 4, free to download
Codebreakers approx £20 +VAT & delivery.

Best Practice Guides | Electrical Safety First - https://www.----------------------------/professional-resources/best-practice-guides/

 

[Ian1981]

It’s up to the individual inspecting to risk assess and apply a suitable code if applicable, not for some scheme to tell you what it should be!
As that code breakers ‘guide’ deem pvc cables concealed in walls without rcd protection a C2 and meter tails that are not 25mm minimum csa ( their words not mine) a C2 , I can’t take the book seriously, I feel I should not be taking advice from persons who feel that no rcd protection to socket outlets in commercial installations regardless of use or whether they supply portable equipment up to 32 amp for use outdoors or not, is a C2.
I’m sure the authors do acknowledge the fact that the codes can vary to a certain degree,depending on the situation.

 

[Charlie_]

The thing is though if you join a scheme then you should to take on board their view on matters, if you don’t agree with them then join a different scheme

 

[Ian1981]

The thing is though if you join a scheme then you should to take on board their view on matters, if you don’t agree with them then join a different scheme

EICR s have nothing to do with being in a scheme, as in you are not required to be in one to carry them out so it should have no bearing.

 

[Charlie_]

Obviously if you’re not in a scheme then you’re not gong to take any notice of their guidelines, criteria or whatever other nonsense they come out with

 

[Ian1981]

My company are Niceic, I just think that you should not blindly follow the book to The nth degree and instead , apply your own skills and understanding of bs7671.
Now we all may have a slight variation on what bs7671 says on certain regulations which is fine up to a point but applying C2 codes for tails that are not 25mm....... I don’t think so, not without reason.

 

[Andy78]

The thing is though if you join a scheme then you should to take on board their view on matters, if you don’t agree with them then join a different scheme

I'm in a scheme to facilitate the notification of jobs. That'll do me for involvement.

 

[Charlie_]

Didn’t say follow anybody blindly.
Have you raised your concerns with the nic?
How do your assessments go?

 

[Charlie_]

I'm in a scheme to facilitate the notification of jobs. That'll do me for involvement.

I notify my own jobs

 

[Andy78]

I notify my own jobs

I wish my local authorities were that enlightened.

 

[Charlie_]

Have you tried notifying them yourself?

 

[Andy78]

Have you tried notifying them yourself?

Years back when I started working for myself I enquired about doing so with my local building control offices. They seemed confused and said they were not equipped to receive notifications. After talking to several clueless types and several emails it became clear I would get nowhere and I just joined a scheme.

I must admit I've not tried since.

 

[Charlie_]

They are called scams for a reason and I think the whole notification malarkey may well just be the biggest one going

 

[Ian1981]

Didn’t say follow anybody blindly.
Have you raised your concerns with the nic?
How do your assessments go?

What do you mean concerns?
Code breakers is a Napit publication and not an Niceic guide so he’d probably have no interest.
On the assessment if the assessor questions a code I have given then we discuss it then realise I was correct.
On a serious note I’ve never been asked to change a code that I have given tho maybe add one I have not considered or perhaps have missed.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Code 1 if within reach in an accessible position, code 2 if it's not. Regarding the tails thing that NAPIT suggest is potentially dangerous....Last week I left 16.0mm tails in place on a board change because replacing them would have involved unacceptable disturbance to decoration. The tails have been there since the early Jurassic, show no signs of thermal stress, and IMO are adequate for the present load despite the 100a service fuse. EIC clearly stated my reasons for leaving them in place. and that if additional load is installed consideration must be given to the adequacy of the supply tails. It's also worth pointing out that often where tails are upgraded by an installer to 25mm to the DB, the tails from the head to the meter often remain 16mm, making it rather pointless. Scam guidance on coding is a useful starting point, but must not be considered 'law'.....we can use our judgement.