EICR's after 1st Jan 2019 ....

[Octopus]

So you are doing an EICR next year and you are inspecting a consumer unit with these 2 "makes" of RCBO's in it ...

So is it:

 

[Nigel]

No code. BS7671 does not mention what sticker is on the RCBO. It is who manufacturers it that is important.

 

[Toneyz]

As from experience and manufacturers, direct information both the RCBO's are identical except for the printed livery on the casing so no code if it was a Hager and Wylex I would tend to say C3 improvement recommended especially if the incorrect RCBO was easily still purchasable.

 

[Pete999]

So you are doing an EICR next year and you are inspecting a consumer unit with these 2 "makes" of RCBO's in it ...

View attachment 44663

So is it:

 

[Octopus]

^^ er and your comment is?

 

[Nigel]

^^ er and your comment is?

He does that all the time.

 

[Toneyz]

He does that all the time.

Some people will do anything to keep the top poster of the month.
Spit it out Pete I know that you trying to say something.

 

[Adam W]

The manufacturers of those two RCBOs have made a conscious attempt to differentiate them selves from each other by branding them differently.

It's not for the end user, installer or even inspector to jump to the conclusion that just because both manufacturers have used the same style of casing, which may well be made by the same manufacturer, that the product inside is exactly the same - I think I would struggle to form a decent court-worthy argument that the reg relates to the manufacturer of the casing and because they look similar the different brands can be ignored.
Substituting a product which looks similar but carries a less well known brand is almost always done for financial reasons and I think a judge or jury would be likely to pick up on that.

C3.

 

[Strima]

Can you guarantee they’ve been manufactured to the exact same standards?

C3 for me.

 

[Toneyz]

The photo of the two RCBO's I was told when enquired by the manufacturer in this case hence the comment.

 

[Ian1981]

The manufacturers of those two RCBOs have made a conscious attempt to differentiate them selves from each other by branding them differently.

It's not for the end user, installer or even inspector to jump to the conclusion that just because both manufacturers have used the same style of casing, which may well be made by the same manufacturer, that the product inside is exactly the same - I think I would struggle to form a decent court-worthy argument that the reg relates to the manufacturer of the casing and because they look similar the different brands can be ignored.
Substituting a product which looks similar but carries a less well known brand is almost always done for financial reasons and I think a judge or jury would be likely to pick up on that.

C3.

Same manufacturer in the op picture but I agree with your comments regarding different brands used

 

[Dillb]

Can see there will be lots of calls and emails to manufacturers in the new yesr regarding this, hooefull they are prepared and have the daya to hand or even better a data sheet for each DB which they could issue if requested.

 

[Ian1981]

It’s an issue that deserves attention now and not only when the 18th edition is in full force

 

[Octopus]

It’s an issue that deserves attention now and not only when the 18th edition is in full force

I've given you a disagreed because I don't think I've ever seen an EICR where different OEM parts have even been commented on , let alone coded

 

[Leesparkykent]

No code for me as lewden brought CGD ages ago. They are manufactured in the same plant they’ve always been and a simple email to lewden will confirm they are designed for boards labeled as CGD. No different to when Schneider brought square D.