EICRs only testing a percentage

[chris day]

I can understand accessories you may only sample a percentage but allot of companies only test %20 of the final circuits.
Thats like taking your car for an MOT and only looking at half the car... should this practice be outlawed as testing firms are getting away is issuing a worthless report and only a small amount tested?
** i know some people test over a period of 5 years, i am exclusively talking about works carried out with no intention to return

 

[telectrix]

with some industrial EICRs, 20% is done one year, a different 20% 1 year later, and so on, so that all circuits are tested within a 5 year period.

 

[chris day]

with some industrial EICRs, 20% is done one year, a different 20% 1 year later,

I understand this but this is generally for commercial or building owners who know what they need.
My post now (edited) refers exclusively to electricians going in once and to never return sorry i should made that clearer

 

[SJD]

If the EICR is not mandatory, it is up to the person ordering the report to agree the extent and limitations with whoever is carrying out the testing & inspection.

However, this is stage is often omitted, whoever doing the EICR might mention or put this in writing beforehand (but perhaps even hope it is not read or understood), or it might not even be mentioned.

I was looking at a report for a care home quite recently, the manager was somewhat shocked when I pointed out just how little they had tested.

 

[Adam W]

I think the way it's supposed to work is more like testing the water in a swimming pool - you scrutinise a tiny sample of what's there which gives you a window into what you might expect in the rest of the pool. That is not to say you can ignore the floater in the opposite corner because that's not where you have chosen to test - if you walk into the property and all the sockets and switches are different makes and at different heights you might suspect that additions have been made by someone who wasn't too fussed about what their work looked like and have a closer look, not write it off as being technically compliant or worse still go looking for something 'better' to sample.

If the 20% "rule" (or more like 'allowance') is continually abused, just like the 'skilled and instructed operatives' exemption for RCDs it will (or should) be disallowed.

 

[Taylortwocities]

Its a reasonable way of carrying out the inspection. Survey 20% of fittings etc. Note this in the limitations panel. Sorted.

If problems/issues are found with some of the 20%, then increase the inspection to a larger percentage.

 

[westward10]

We do EICRs for a large retail chain, full 100%. There are occasions when they use another contractor and for some reason they send us the Report, a Report of limitations and no tests.

 

[ipf]

We generally do 100%, or as near to as possible. Limitations for lack of access for various reasons come occur. As regards 20%, this comes into play regarding high level lighting, as a rule. Any problems leading to further investigation...but you can generally get a good idea from those inspected. An example, we found lighting in a heavy duty environment wired in YY cable so that puts you on immediate alert. terrible continuity results and damaged/crushed/small cables found. Condemned the lot.
Sometimes we have trouble with total isolation if they don't want it but, again, if there are any alarms, arrangements have to be made.
I've quoted recently for a works but I'm not too confident, knowing the extent some test to. On the other hand, some 'limited' testers still bang high quotes in.

It's supposed to be 3 years for some, these days, too.

 

[Ian1981]

You are supposed to provide a separate attachment for the samples you have taken so that in future inspections and testing the same ‘samples’ are not sampled again.
Never have a seen such an attached sheet providing information of what accessories have been sampled on previous EICRs.

 

[ipf]

You are supposed to provide a separate attachment for the samples you have taken so that in future inspections and testing the same ‘samples’ are not sampled again.
Never have a seen such an attached sheet providing information of what accessories have been sampled on previous EICRs.

If you've got the previous docs, why does it matter. It should be noted on the previous schedules, just check for limitations.

 

[Ian1981]

If you've got the previous docs, why does it matter. It should be noted on the previous schedules, just check for limitations.

We use the Niceic certs and this is mentioned in the schedule of inspections to provide the locations of said samples so I duly oblige.
Whether this is on the model forms in bs7671 is irrelevant as we are required to use the NICEIC forms by the man who pays the wages.

 

[ipf]

We use the Niceic certs and this is mentioned in the schedule of inspections to provide the locations of said samples so I duly oblige.
Whether this is on the model forms in bs7671 is irrelevant as we are required to use the NICEIC forms by the man who pays the wages.

Fair enough. I'll lose no sleep.

Is that under 'other special installations or locations'?

 

[Ian1981]

Fair enough. I'll lose no sleep.

Is that under 'other special installations or locations'?

Neither

 

[ipf]

Neither

?
It's one section

 

[Ian1981]

?
It's one section

6.21 in the schedule of items inspected on the Niceic version of an Eicr.
Identify numbers and locations Of items inspected in section D which is your extent of the installation inspected.
So I might have agreed 30% of accessories sampled per circuit where applicable and I’ll mention the location(s) such as say prescription room and reception area as I did when I tested a doctors surgery the other week.