EICR - No Line or CPC Continuity on Ring

[James]

So, RN tested out fine, but R1 - open circuit, R2 - open circuit ! Oh joy. At this point the current tenant piped up and said "Should I have mentioned some of the sockets were getting hot ?!"

Anyway according to the Codebreakers guide I should be giving this a C2 (Actually I'm thinking of giving it an FI), and handing the report to the landlord. I admit I don't get many outright failures, but this one obviously is.

In this case, i see no reason to stray from the codebreakers advice.

also as mentioned, some sockets getting hot, leads me to think there is a very high chance of some overloaded cables or terminals.

It is potentially dangerous.
do you need to do further investigation to figure out if it is dangerous?
as a temporary fix, improvement the ocpd could be changed for a 20A (still leaving the possibility of some free cable ends floating around somewhere)
but really it needs marking down as a failure so it gets repaired.

 

[Strima]

As a temporary fix reducing the OCPD size will work however the broken conductor needs to be found. This needs to be repaired as a lose conductor could potentially be fatal.

 

[James]

As a temporary fix reducing the OCPD size will work however the broken conductor needs to be found. This needs to be repaired as a lose conductor could potentially be fatal.

You are Quite correct, I did fail to make that clear in my post.
Well spotted.

 

[westward10]

Any open conductors on a ring final is going to be a C2. I normally IR test across the ends to see if there is a tenuous connection.

 

[Flanders]

I think the confusion comes from the fact to rectify a brocken ring requires investigation and further testing. But this is an EICR and you are reporting on the condition of the installation. So in this case a brocken ring has been identified. Which will become dangerous if the circuit is overloaded . No further investigation is required to find out if the brocken ring is potentially dangerous .we know it is . So I would code 2 it

 

[loz2754]

[open_rant]

This is not, in no way, never will be, cannot possibly be, construed as an FI.
No further investigation is necessary because the fault has already been identified. C2.
Yes, further works are necessary ie finding and rectifying the fault.

[close_rant]
[end]

 

[brianmoooore]

Converting a broken ring into two radials without investigating the break is not acceptable. If the break is as the result of a screw through the cable, then there will still be the possibility of a live screw somewhere, even after the the breaker has been downrated.
None of this comes under the scope of an EICR. The fault gets a C2 as a minimum, and if a wander around with a voltage detector finds a live screw, or a screw in a 'safe zone', then it's a C1.
Fault rectification comes later, and if the decision is taken to split the ring into two radials is made, then the section of cable with the fault needs to be identified and completely disconnected at both ends.

 

[LewisM]

Had exactly the same before and this was the cause as previously said live and earth blown apart.

 

[ruston]

Personally this bit would of worried me .

So, RN tested out fine, but R1 - open circuit, R2 - open circuit ! Oh joy. At this point the current tenant piped up and said "Should I have mentioned some of the sockets were getting hot ?!"

 

[vwes59]

Just seen an image of a damaged cable and the body of a mouse, and it's made me remember a throw away comment from the tenant that they've had mouse issues. Just shows how important it is to listen to the occupier as well as doing the inspection. I admit that just didn't register with me.

I can see the arguments for and against a C2 or FI in this case. I've found a fault and know what it is, but currently I don't know where it is or the fix to put it right, so the first bit is a C2, but it's also an FI because I don't know why the fault exists. However I've only been paid to do the EICR not to fix, so you could say I've provided the information necessary for another sparky to investigate and fix, so yes I can see a C2 would be right. I do wonder if the FI status should be scrapped to be honest.

 

[i=p/u]

unidentified circuits can have FI

 

[mark101]

I disagree @Paignton pete and @buzzlightyear

This is an inspection only.

there is no further investigation required, a fault has been found in 2 conductors of a ring.
report it's condition as C2 and move on.

if it was not a ring, and the cpc was broken, It may well be a C1, no further investigation is required to find where it is broken. just report it and move on.

Obviously to fix the fault will require further investigation (AKA Fault Finding) as it has not been precisely located.

You can't report a C1 and move on you either have to fix it there and then or isolate that circuit. I have just today been to a job that someone else has inspected (eicr) and failed because there was no end to end continuity on house sockets r1 and rn but cpc was ok, I was asked to attend and fix the fault the other tester found. (I found the fault it was an incorrectly terminated spur unit) however this fault led to severe thermal damage on two of the sockets worse I have seen in a long time to be honest, back of skts melted away another day or 2 and this could of been much worse. This gave cause of concern to me as should the electrician who tested this leave the property knowing there was no continuity on the ring and knowing this can lead to excessive overload on the circuit

 

[DPG]

You can't report a C1 and move on you either have to fix it there and then or isolate that circuit. I have just today been to a job that someone else has inspected (eicr) and failed because there was no end to end continuity on house sockets r1 and rn but cpc was ok, I was asked to attend and fix the fault the other tester found. (I found the fault it was an incorrectly terminated spur unit) however this fault led to severe thermal damage on two of the sockets worse I have seen in a long time to be honest, back of skts melted away another day or 2 and this could of been much worse. This gave cause of concern to me as should the electrician who tested this leave the property knowing there was no continuity on the ring and knowing this can lead to excessive overload on the circuit

Looks like that's had loose connections.

 

[i=p/u]

Mark 101, he does not have to fix it, unless agreed Of course. As for disconnecting circuits, that's another story....

 

[Deleted account]

It all comes back to whether is a C1 or not.

if you deemed it to be a C1 you have to either correct it or dont re energise it.

any other code, yes report and move on. You are not there to make alterations additions or repairs. You are 5here to report on the condition of the installation at the time of testing.

obviously an FI could be an immediately dangerous situation after further investigation, but at this stage before you investigate you won’t know because you haven’t looked into the fault yet as that’s not what you are there to do.

You can’t criticise a sparky who fails to identify an immediately dangerous situation in a circuit if they have classed that circuit as FI. they have identified something is wrong but would need further investigation to know if it’s a C1 or C2.