Inspection and Testing

[Charlie_]

Right, not got going yet..
Actually if you don’t test a system and it’s associated equipment you are failing to comply with 4(1) and 5,7 & 8.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Here’s a link to a 2012 judgment made in regards to DNOs not maintaining Cut Outs:
http://fy68w4dd72j1r1z33vbuky14-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/smith_-v-_edf.pdf
It was shown that the DNO’s had failed to inspect the cut outs, failed to adopt a program of replacement for aging cut outs and failed to keep adequate records of the type and age of cut outs in any given installation.
However, it could not be proved that inspection, replacement or keeping records would have prevented the fires.

 

[Charlie_]

That looks interesting, I shall have a read of that as soon as costa opens..
Slightly different scenario to that in question though..
There has been other cases where a lack of testing failed to show a lack of insulation, earthing and RCD protection

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I found it particularly interesting as at the time there was a lot of discusion about plastic CUs being dangerous and how they should be replaced with metal CUs.

 

[Deleted member 72666]

My 'old' copy of the eawr regulation 4(2) 8 states:
Regular inspection of equipment is an essential part of any preventive maintenance program, blah,blah.
and reg 4(2)9 states:
Records of maintenance, including test results, preferably kept throughout the working life of the electrical system. And goes on to say: Without effective monitoring duty holders cannot be certain that the requirement for maintenance has been complied with.

 

[Intoelectrics]

My 'old' copy of the eawr regulation 4(2) 8 states:
Regular inspection of equipment is an essential part of any preventive maintenance program, blah,blah.
and reg 4(2)9 states:
Records of maintenance, including test results, preferably kept throughout the working life of the electrical system. And goes on to say: Without effective monitoring duty holders cannot be certain that the requirement for maintenance has been complied with.

Yes, so this is the point! You won't get prosecuted for not doing an inspection and test unless someone in authority is going to go to the trouble of checking to see if you are following the BS guidelines in ensuring the electrical system is safe. BUT! if someone has an accident or there is any other investigation that resulted in the electrical system being at fault, then the person responsible will be liable and likely prosecuted if taken to court.
Its a bit like driving a car years ago with no MOT. Before there were digital checks people could quite easily drive their car with no MOT until it either came to tax it or you were stopped by the police for a producer or you were involved in an accident. Thankfully these days checks are more stringent and people cannot get away so easily with driving a dangerous vehicle.
This is where, in my personal opinion, electrical safety checks should be mandatory.
Any decent sparky knows the potential dangers of not testing a system before putting it into service!

 

[Toneyz]

Ok I know this but is it against the law put into service without certification.

Is it more your question that you have done all the inspection and testing and all complies but you have not produced/compleated the certificate?

 

[DPG]

I can't think of any good reason for the OP asking the question unless he has installed something without any testing, or (as per Anthony) he hasn't bothered filling in a cert.

OP - can you confirm why the original question is being asked?

 

[DPG]

So for what is Inspection and Testing if is not necessary? Where is the sense ?

Nobody said it isn't necessary. How do you know everything is OK if you don't test it?