EICR Rip off....?

[Beavstro]

Hi guys, just looking for some advice on a EICR my brothers wife had done on her grandmothers house.

He he asked me to look over the report as he thinks he's being ripped off, which I must admit it does reek of.

Firstly for for example it has a C1 for the distribution board for a blank missing. Cost to rectify £30!!!

another couple of things which is sounds fair enough like no earth to lights. And there is a metal light in the living room.
But rather than just note this, the guy has stated it needs an earth run to it.
I had a quick look at this problem and opened a switch and it's wired in conduit, presumably with the Cpc being supplied by the metal conduit.
this wasn't noted on the report, nor a further investigation req. to see if that would be viable for the earth.
If it was okay there would be no need for a separate earth to be run and no need for the big cost also involved to do it. Was requesting £160 to earth the lights!

I would (if it was me) also have given the option to simply replace the fittings with class 2 fittings, and a label at the board, at a much reduced cost. They didn't give this option or even mention it.

Another point was was the main bonding, the gas is bonded, but no visible bond to water.
But in the report its ticked as okay, then further on saying it needs doing. But it simply states on the follow on work to "investigate main bonding" with no mention of remedial work involved. At £58.
Again fair enough it does need doing.
this is just for my own curiosity really, but if there is no visual bond, how would you test the incoming water to see of there was bonding?
at a guess and please correct me if this is silly, but I would isolate the supply, disconnect the main earth, then do a wander lead test the water to the MET to see if it is bonded.
is that a safe approach to check it?

Interesting to see other people's work, but seems like these guys are at it a bit here.....

 

[Richard Burns]

From the content you mention on the report this is providing solutions to the problems and not just reporting the problems, I would usually complete the report and provide a covering letter with solution's.
However I believe the vast majority do not do this, unfortunately.

The prices quoted seem high, but I have not seen the situation. The only time I might consider £30 for a replacement blank is if he has to drive 50 miles each way and this is agreed in advance.
A missing blank is C1 if the busbar is available to touch.

If the circuits are supplied by earthed conduit then I would have expected a large number of these comments if he has not realised the conduit is supplying the earth. If the conduit is indeed suitable then this should have been identified as unearthed because there is no earth tail to the lights. If the conduit is not suitable then £160 to run an earth sounds about right, as a 4mm conductor would need to be run from the CU to the light position.
A class II light would be an easier solution.

If the bonding is present to the water then there should be a bonding conductor in the CU or at the MET, then testing continuity from the disconnected bonding conductor to the water pipe near the incomer may give an indication that there is a bonding clamp somewhere, but it would only be an indication, many other things could cause a low continuity from bonding conductor to water pipe.
Testing to the MET would be almost certain to provide a low conductivity.
If there is no bonding conductor in the CU/MET then there is probably no bonding to the water, although it may be run on from the gas, depending on the physical layout.
It would still be C3 for no accessible bonding connection.

From the report this should have been a further investigation required, the remedial work could not be specified until the further investigation was done.

 

[davesparks]

Firstly for for example it has a C1 for the distribution board for a blank missing. Cost to rectify £30!!!

another couple of things which is sounds fair enough like no earth to lights. And there is a metal light in the living room.
But rather than just note this, the guy has stated it needs an earth run to it.
I had a quick look at this problem and opened a switch and it's wired in conduit, presumably with the Cpc being supplied by the metal conduit.
this wasn't noted on the report, nor a further investigation req. to see if that would be viable for the earth.
If it was okay there would be no need for a separate earth to be run and no need for the big cost also involved to do it. Was requesting £160 to earth the lights!

I would (if it was me) also have given the option to simply replace the fittings with class 2 fittings, and a label at the board, at a much reduced cost. They didn't give this option or even mention it.

How much would you charge for fitting a blank? What board is it? How much are the proper blanks? What would be a reasonable minimum charge for labour and travel etc?

The idea of fitting class 2 light fittings and a label at the board is not acceptable under the regulations, it is a nonsense dreamed up by the NIC/ESC etc as a bodge around doing the job properly and even then they say it's only to be done when absoloutely impossible to fix it properly.
Add to that a steel conduit installation will almost certainly be impossible to have as a class 2 installation it seems that you are handing out rather more bad advice than this electrician

 

[Paul.M]

How much would you charge for fitting a blank? What board is it? How much are the proper blanks? What would be a reasonable minimum charge for labour and travel etc?

Most sparks have blanks in the van, just fit one there and then without charging, I do.

The idea of fitting class 2 light fittings and a label at the board is not acceptable under the regulations, it is a nonsense dreamed up by the NIC/ESC etc as a bodge around doing the job properly and even then they say it's only to be done when absoloutely impossible to fix it properly.

It is a Reg btw, not just a scheme recommendation.

Add to that a steel conduit installation will almost certainly be impossible to have as a class 2 installation it seems that you are handing out rather more bad advice than this electrician

Dave, this is in the Trainee Section! Please look before posting.

 

[Robson689]

Add to that a steel conduit installation will almost certainly be impossible to have as a class 2 installation it seems that you are handing out rather more bad advice than this electrician

Just out of curiosity, why? I always thought that conduit was acceptable as cpc if it's all connected properly and tests fine etc

 

[davesparks]

Just out of curiosity, why? I always thought that conduit was acceptable as cpc if it's all connected properly and tests fine etc

Yes steel conduit is there to be the cpc of the circuits contained within.
But what I said is that it will likely not be suitable for a class 2 (double insulated) installation, the cables inside it will be single insulated for a start, not double!
The regulations allow insulated and sheathed cables to be considered as equivalent to double insulation but only if they comply with certain requirements (can't remember of the top of my head as I've never used that form of protection, but it's in the book)

 

[davesparks]

It is a Reg btw, not just a scheme recommendation.

Dave, this is in the Trainee Section! Please look before posting.

Which regulation would that be then?

Oh ****, my apologies to the OP if I have caused offence.

 

[davesparks]

It is a Reg btw, not just a scheme recommendation.

412.1.3 requires that where double insulation is used as the protective measure for a circuit the installation must be under effective supervision in normal use.

Section 514, identification and notices provides no standard label for this purpose as you would expect.

The NIC/ESC nonsense stipulates that RCD protection be provided as part of their bodge which would make that RCD the sole means of protection. So also does not comply with 415.1.2 the use of RCDs is not recognised as a sole means of protection and does not obviate the need to apply one of the protective measures specified in sections 411 to 414.

 

[Beavstro]

How much would you charge for fitting a blank? What board is it? How much are the proper blanks? What would be a reasonable minimum charge for labour and travel etc?

I hadn't thought about adding travel time into the equation, which would be more sensible, but would usually as Paul says have them In the van and just fit there and then.

The idea of fitting class 2 light fittings and a label at the board is not acceptable under the regulations, it is a nonsense dreamed up by the NIC/ESC etc as a bodge around doing the job properly and even then they say it's only to be done when absoloutely impossible to fix it properly.
Add to that a steel conduit installation will almost certainly be impossible to have as a class 2 installation it seems that you are handing out rather more bad advice than this electrician

I had thought under Reg 411.3.1.1 in BGB (haven't got the yellow one from work home) that a pendant light would be okay?

 

[davesparks]

I had thought under Reg 411.3.1.1 in BGB (haven't got the yellow one from work home) that a pendant light would be okay?

One pendant maybe, but that doesn't help with the whole circuit being in steel conduit and so can't be a double insulated installation.