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]

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

This is true, oil leak doesn't require the knowledge or access to the related regulation. It says what it is on the tin but citing a departure from BS7671, aside from for example the consumer unit has no cover fitted, Code 3 which is obvious and requires no regulation to reinforce it they are pointless to the lamen.

 

[Grant1987]

This is true, oil leak doesn't require the knowledge or access to the related regulation. It says what it is on the tin but citing a departure from BS7671, aside from for example the consumer unit has no cover fitted, Code 3 which is obvious and requires no regulation to reinforce it they are pointless to the lamen.

Or even the double socket in living room is damaged and allows access to live parts. I don’t know the regs number but I know it means immediate danger.

 

[Zerax]

This is true, oil leak doesn't require the knowledge or access to the related regulation. It says what it is on the tin but citing a departure from BS7671, aside from for example the consumer unit has no cover fitted, Code 3 which is obvious and requires no regulation to reinforce it they are pointless to the lamen.

I'm with Julie on this one... I think having a reg number is very useful to several people. Having it on the report in no way requires all readers of that report to have a copy of the regs book to learn what they mean. However, if they wish to learn more, they can look it up in a friends copy. (We're a friendly bunch !)

In the case of the OP... it would enable him to find out exactly what the inspector is on about and raise a query. In the case of the Inspector, it would allow him to refresh his memory of the regs.
[automerge]1601070960[/automerge]
I think we're back to the other recent thread on EICRs... if you ask 10 sparks for a report... you'll probably get 9 different answers !

 

[Grant1987]

I'm with Julie on this one... I think having a reg number is very useful to several people. Having it on the report in no way requires all readers of that report to have a copy of the regs book to learn what they mean. However, if they wish to learn more, they can look it up in a friends copy. (We're a friendly bunch !)

In the case of the OP... it would enable him to find out exactly what the inspector is on about and raise a query. In the case of the Inspector, it would allow him to refresh his memory of the regs.

Ok I’m not disagreeing here but what is better giving a description or just giving regs number? I know giving both is the perfect scenario but in my opinion the description outweighs the regs number

 

[Dartlec]

Ok I’m not disagreeing here but what is better giving a description or just giving regs number? I know giving both is the perfect scenario but in my opinion the description outweighs the regs number

Definitely should be a description in 'laymans' terms imo - particularly where the person requesting the report is domestic - might well be different for a large commercial or industrial installation. The reg no by itself doesn't always specify the exact problem and needs further clarification. For domestic, the descripton is more important than the reg no, but it does add something and looks more 'official' imo than just a description. (Check out Dave Savery's latest video for some crackers).

The only thing I don't like about my software is that it adds the reg number then just adds 'is recommended for improvement' - but I have a list of phrases for common issues now.

 

[Julie.]

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

No, absolutely not.

The document has several audiences, there is the high-level manager's view which is the basic summary on the first page - the installation is/is not suitable type of thing, there is the user's view which is the written descriptions "cable in airing cupboard has insufficient mechanical protection " and so on.

Then there is the detailed information, which is useful only for technical purposes, such as the whole test schedules - how could the end user understand cable installation 102; r1+r2 = 0.87(then some form of odd squiggle - they aren't to know it means ohms - whatever they are) and so on, to my mind this detailed aspect of the report should include the regulation information, so the unprotected cable - if this was claimed to be 522.6.?? (Can't remember the actual reg) - protection needed for ag2 environment - at least the person carrying out the repair could read it and actually identify what the issue is, and realise where the writer got it wrong!

I gave the mot example because this follows exactly the same principles, the summary pass/fail, the description suitable for me the vehicle owner, and finally the actual code specific such that the mechanics could identify not only is there a leak but it is on the engine/gearbox/whatever - as this is identified by the code, which yes is meaningless to me

 

[Grant1987]

Definitely should be a description in 'laymans' terms imo - particularly where the person requesting the report is domestic - might well be different for a large commercial or industrial installation. The reg no by itself doesn't always specify the problem and needs further clarification. For domestic, the descripton is more important than the reg no, but it does add something and looks more 'official' imo than just a description. (Check out Dave Savery's latest video for some crackers).

The only thing I don't like about my software is that it adds the reg number then just adds 'is recommended for improvement' - but I have a list of phrases for common issues now.

Yes is a mixed bag and I wish I knew all the regs numbers off top of my head but as I’ve said before I know what’s wrong, right and then borderline which is where places like this forum help us to improve and gain more knowledge. The commercial side most definately takes more time and more thought process that’s why they take much longer to test/certify due to the complex regulations compared to the domestic. Moral of story is give description and regs number when listing recommendations
[automerge]1601071955[/automerge]

No, absolutely not.

The document has several audiences, there is the high-level manager's view which is the basic summary on the first page - the installation is/is not suitable type of thing, there is the user's view which is the written descriptions "cable in airing cupboard has insufficient mechanical protection " and so on.

Then there is the detailed information, which is useful only for technical purposes, such as the whole test schedules - how could the end user understand cable installation 102; r1+r2 = 0.87(then some form of odd squiggle - they aren't to know it means ohms - whatever they are) and so on, to my mind this detailed aspect of the report should include the regulation information, so the unprotected cable - if this was claimed to be 522.6.?? (Can't remember the actual reg) - protection needed for ag2 environment - at least the person carrying out the repair could read it and actually identify what the issue is, and realise where the writer got it wrong!

I gave the mot example because this follows exactly the same principles, the summary pass/fail, the description suitable for me the vehicle owner, and finally the actual code specific such that the mechanics could identify not only is there a leak but it is on the engine/gearbox/whatever - as this is identified by the code, which yes is meaningless to me

I’m not disagreeing with you Julie, i would love to be able to give the regs number straight off when writing my description but for those of us who aren’t doing it digitally then it becomes more difficult although I do prefer the digital software and will definitely be going back to it ASAP looks more professional ?

 

[Julie.]

Yes is a mixed bag and I wish I knew all the regs numbers off top of my head but as I’ve said before I know what’s wrong, right and then borderline which is where places like this forum help us to improve and gain more knowledge. The commercial side most definately takes more time and more thought process that’s why they take much longer to test/certify due to the complex regulations compared to the domestic. Moral of story is give description and regs number when listing recommendations
[automerge]1601071955[/automerge]

I’m not disagreeing with you Julie, i would love to be able to give the regs number straight off when writing my description but for those of us who aren’t doing it digitally then it becomes more difficult although I do prefer the digital software and will definitely be going back to it ASAP looks more professional ?

This is one good aspect of the nappit guide, it's fairly easy to find the text to an issue, and the corresponding reg is listed.

Personally when I receive an eicr and it hasn't cross referenced the appropriate regs, I treat it with much suspicion, and it usually does have "dodgy" observations.

The best i like to see is something like "cable to smoker's area damaged exposing armour" -C3 regulation 522.xx.xx

But so many state "cable needs replacing" c2 £275+vat - which is useless in every regard


Just look at this thread, because the eicr has no reference to the reg, the inspector has provided suspicious evasive answers, and we end up with a huge range of posts and guessing about what the hell these codes have been given for.

The op is left in a mess because once the eicr is produced and it is not satisfactory - potentially for completely nonsense reasons, he either gets a new professional eicr or pays for work that may not actually be needed

 

[Grant1987]

This is one good aspect of the nappit guide, it's fairly easy to find the text to an issue, and the corresponding reg is listed.

Personally when I receive an eicr and it hasn't cross referenced the appropriate regs, I treat it with much suspicion, and it usually does have "dodgy" observations.

The best i like to see is something like "cable to smoker's area damaged exposing armour" -C3 regulation 522.xx.xx

But so many state "cable needs replacing" c2 £275+vat - which is useless in every regard


Just look at this thread, because the eicr has no reference to the reg, the inspector has provided suspicious evasive answers, and we end up with a huge range of posts and guessing about what the hell these codes have been given for.

The op is left in a mess because once the eicr is produced and it is not satisfactory - potentially for completely nonsense reasons, he either gets a new professional eicr or pays for work that may not actually be needed

I think your being a bit harsh on the description there? Lol “cable needs replacing” £275 it should be more like 6mm pvc/pvc cable supplying 10kw shower protected by 40A mcb. Cable csa undersized for load requirement and mcb not suitable for cable selection.

 

[Julie.]

I think your being a bit harsh on the description there? Lol “cable needs replacing” £275 it should be more like 6mm pvc/pvc cable supplying 10kw shower protected by 40A mcb. Cable csa undersized for load requirement and mcb not suitable for cable selection.

Nope, that one was pretty much word for word off an eicr on a hotel/restaurant - they had lights fed via a swa cable in a smoker's shelter for staff away from the actual hotel, the swa had been hit by big metal wheely bins .

 

[Grant1987]

Nope, that one was pretty much word for word off an eicr on a hotel/restaurant - they had lights fed via a swa cable in a smoker's shelter for staff away from the actual hotel, the swa had been hit by big metal wheely bins .

Wow, that’s a bad description very blunt too he cudn be arsed to elaborate did he? Lol point taken but I still think a good description is more beneficial not a vague one

 

[Julie.]

Wow, that’s a bad description very blunt too he cudn be arsed to elaborate did he? Lol point taken but I still think a good description is more beneficial not a vague one

You would be surprised how many are like that though - ok I probably only see the bad ones as they get passed through to me, the good ones can be delt with by the owners or similar.

But it really reads like an excuse for justification of work, and dodgy reports soo often it gives me a very jaded view of the whole eicr thing, too many people not actually capable of producing a genuine report or understanding what they are doing, and using it as a sales aid .

Write a sh*t report - making sure that you detail a load of stuff that's easy to do but you can charge a lot for.

 

[Grant1987]

You would be surprised how many are like that though - ok I probably only see the bad ones as they get passed through to me, the good ones can be delt with by the owners or similar.

But it really reads like an excuse for justification of work, and dodgy reports soo often it gives me a very jaded view of the whole eicr thing, too many people not actually capable of producing a genuine report or understanding what they are doing, and using it as a sales aid .

Write a sh*t report - making sure that you detail a load of stuff that's easy to do but you can charge a lot for.

It’s pretty evident when you have a report carried out by a competent electrician by the terminology I used to be slack with my words but always looking to improve. When the description is vague it looks dodgy but with proper electrical terminology it becomes clear that the person carrying out EICR understands what they are talking about

 

[Zerax]

Ok I’m not disagreeing here but what is better giving a description or just giving regs number? I know giving both is the perfect scenario but in my opinion the description outweighs the regs number

I was saying we should have a description in plain English and the relevant reg number.

 

[richy3333]

So if cables below 2.4m need to be covered then doesn't that cause issues with most sheds in the uk?