Inspection & testing pass/fail

[LPM]

Hi everyone,

just for the general discussion. I found a bit of a grey area when you issue certificate. Would you issue satisfactory certificate if installation complies with i.e. 16th edition but not the 17th?

 

[Guest55]

if no other potentially dangerous defects are found , then yes

 

[telectrix]

Re: Inspection & testing pass/fail

you would code non compliance with 17th as a C3, which is a satisfactory as long as there are no immediate or potential dangers.

- - - Updated - - -

beaten by the troll. :81:

 

[Octopus]

Agree with both of the above. Sparks giving unsatisfactory to older installations just becasuee they were installed prior to the 17th ed don't help our professional cause.

 

[telectrix]

Re: Inspection & testing pass/fail

or give unbonded studwork a C1..... a 32A MCB on a 2.5mm RFC a C2.

- - - Updated - - -

or give unbonded studwork a C1..... a 32A MCB on a 2.5mm RFC a C2.

 

[LPM]

Ok so simple question, why then 17th edition was released if 16th was safe enough ? Also how could you give satisfactory cert if its non compliance with existing 7671. I would appreciate to make a note that general/overall condition is in good order but would still issue unsatisfactory cert.

 

[Sintra]

When you do an EICR you can't give it unsatisfactory if it complies to the version of the regs that it was wired to. All you can do is C3 anything that doesn't meet the current regs. So for example an installation done in 1982 to the 15th edition with no deviations from those standards is still satisfactory.

 

[Rampantchilli]

diy'er?
home owner disgruntled with EICR?

 

[chrish_1977]

Inspection & testing pass/fail

The Inspection is not retrospective, so if it was installed under the 16 th, and it meets the regs for that then, all you can do is make notes to bring it to the 17th, it's no less safe, just doesn't meet current regs

 

[Octopus]

Ok so simple question, why then 17th edition was released if 16th was safe enough ? Also how could you give satisfactory cert if its non compliance with existing 7671. I would appreciate to make a note that general/overall condition is in good order but would still issue unsatisfactory cert.

Would you buy a car without seat belts, airbags and side protection - I wouldn't, so regs updates are about progress!

 

[telectrix]

more about the guys at IET needing new siuts and computers every 3 years

 

[LPM]

When you do an EICR you can't give it unsatisfactory if it complies to the version of the regs that it was wired to. All you can do is C3 anything that doesn't meet the current regs. So for example an installation done in 1982 to the 15th edition with no deviations from those standards is still satisfactory.

So you doing periodic as a safety check and issu satisfactory certificate cause it complies with 15th edition and it is safe while 17th edition released so far. Something goes wrong and the reason of that would be one of the reasons why they amended 15th edition up to 17th and will come back to you saying you said it is safe. So what excuse you will say? I made a note that it complies with 15th edition put my signature that it is safe and you let landlord to get away for 5 years without upgrading installation to current standard which is safe enough for nowadays. I think note is not good enough because people do not understand 15th or 17th ed they only want to get clean and satisfactory cert. All techs moving and they have to maintain and upgrade their electrics as we do maintain our cars etc. It's like I said probably better to write that installation in good order but needs bringing up to standard rather to issue satisfactory.

 

[LPM]

Re: Inspection & testing pass/fail

The Inspection is not retrospective, so if it was installed under the 16 th, and it meets the regs for that then, all you can do is make notes to bring it to the 17th, it's no less safe, just doesn't meet current regs

If it is no less safe why would you make amendments?

 

[Plonker 3]

To make it safer.

 

[telectrix]

the whole point of an EICR is to " determine whether or not the installation is fit for continued use". would you take a car off the road just because it didn't have airbags and ABS?