EICR what code for inaccessible socket

[Adelaide]

Hi. To get a satisfactory EICR does every single socket need to be easily accessible eg if socket for a fridge or washing machine is behind on the wall, so you cant reach and need to pull machine forward away from wall to access the plug, is that unsatisfactory? ie C2

 

[westward10]

As above those responses are ridiculous unless he is willing to change his approach contact the NICEIC and tell him what you plan to do.

 

[Vortigern]

What can I do if this electrician is using his judgement inappropriately to get himself work

Simple, get another electrician to do the remedial work.

 

[telectrix]

both those C2's are a joke. at the absolute worst, the socket behind the w/m could be a LIM. the airing cupboard cable is compliant. the idiot who did the eicr needs retaining. he's incompetent.perhaps he should take up plumbing or shelf srtacking.

 

[Dartlec]

Chiming in to add to the agreement that this coding seems harsh, bordering on unreasonable - assuming that there isn't something that can't be seen or hasn't been mentioned.

Unfortunately (Or fortunately, depending on your view), EICRs are left to the engineering judgement of the inspector and are not merely a tick box exercise. However, any coding should be linked to relevant regs to back up the code, not just on the basis of what is 'nice'.

There is a general regulation that isolation should be available, and in a new installation, it would be good practise to put a fused spur to control this socket, but that doesn't mean the lack of it reaches the level of a C2 (potential danger) in my view.

In theory, as I read the law for landlords (Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer), you do not need to get the EICR reissued with a 'satisfactory' rating - you merely need to have confirmed in writing that "remedial works necessary" have been done. This, together with your original certificate, should then show that you have complied with the law.

So something in writing from a suitable electrician stating that the issues mentioned do not create a potential danger may cover you, and cost less than having yet another EICR done.

Unfortunately, letting agents or tenants will likely only see the 'unsatisfactory' on the EICR and have a negative reaction, so it's not the best situation.

Contacting the NICEIC is certainly worth doing, if only because it may raise an awkward question at the next assessment and ensure the contractor involved does at least know how to back up his findings with actual regulations.

 

[westward10]

There is no requirement to quote Regulation numbers.

 

[Julie.]

Me: What does shower cable need protecting from??
Reply : All cable below 2.4M in height need to be covered.

Was the guy an ex utility man?

There is a rule in en43-8 that requires mechanical protection on all utility cables when fixed on the outside and directly to buildings below 2.4m

This does not extend to internal wiring systems.

In reality if the cable is installation method c (fixed direct) and it is then enclosed in trunking or conduit it will have a lower current capacity, I don't know sizes of cable or ratings of load, but if wrong, it could convert a safe installation into one susceptible to overheating.

Unlikely, but actually possible.

 

[Dartlec]

There is no requirement to quote Regulation numbers.

Agreed - however, since the EICR is against the latest regulations the codes should be traceable back to a regulation number on request to support the judgement, surely? It's the reason why the BPG states that certain things outside the regulations may be poor practise but should not be coded.

My software automatically includes them and I leave them in because I think they are useful, if not to the customer, then to anyone else looking at the observations.

 

[westward10]

Software may well include them but there is no requirement to include them, let's face it nine times out of ten they are meaningless to the client unless they have the document to reference them to. The Best Practice Guide is not really relevant.

 

[Grant1987]

Software may well include them but there is no requirement to include them, let's face it nine times out of ten they are meaningless to the client unless they have the document to reference them to. The Best Practice Guide is not really relevant.

I don’t quote regs numbers these days as I’m doing old fashioned pen and paper I just write description where it reflects the regs number, however I was using easy cert by tysoft previously which automatically brings up the regs number I will be converting back to digital ASAP because it does look more professional

 

[Julie.]

I know you don't like the idea of providing this information, but I think it is useful especially in cases such as this where it could reduce the nonsense observations - if the guy believes there is a rule stating that cables lower than 2.4m have to be enclosed and he has to find it, perhaps if he can't he will realise it isn't the case and shouldn't be coded

 

[westward10]

I know you don't like the idea of providing this information, but I think it is useful especially in cases such as this where it could reduce the nonsense observations - if the guy believes there is a rule stating that cables lower than 2.4m have to be enclosed and he has to find it, perhaps if he can't he will realise it isn't the case and shouldn't be coded

I agree but the client would need access to the relevant document.

 

[Grant1987]

I know you don't like the idea of providing this information, but I think it is useful especially in cases such as this where it could reduce the nonsense observations - if the guy believes there is a rule stating that cables lower than 2.4m have to be enclosed and he has to find it, perhaps if he can't he will realise it isn't the case and shouldn't be coded

Only thing I can think of with regards of 2.4 metres isn’t it bathroom light not required to be suitably IP rated if ceiling height that high? When no rcd protection provided. I might be wrong I always install suitable up rated light in bathroom but sure a few years ago that was a reg? Sure some of you will know more

 

[westward10]

Vertical bathroom zone is 225mm.

 

[Julie.]

I agree but the client would need access to the relevant document.

Why?

Why i get a note on a mot (such as minor oil leak) - there is a reference number, referring to the actual mot regulation it relates to (8.4.1 (a) (i))

There is no requirement for me to have access to the relevant document

The words are sufficient for me, but the code highlights exactly the detailed issue for those who do have a use for it

 

[Grant1987]

Vertical bathroom zone is 225mm.

2250mm I know what you mean lol
[automerge]1601069145[/automerge]

2250mm I know what you mean lol

I’m pretty sure the 2.4mtr rule did apply a few years ago bugging me now because it’s an old requirement I’ll google it now lol
[automerge]1601069224[/automerge]

Why?

Why i get a note on a mot (such as minor oil leak) - there is a reference number, referring to the actual mot regulation it relates to (8.4.1 (a) (i))

There is no requirement for me to have access to the relevant document

The words are sufficient for me, but the code highlights exactly the detailed issue for those who do have a use for it

So if I just quote a regs number without description that is better in your opinion?