Install cert required if eicr has been done

[richy3333]

Sometimes I really despair at questions asked! OP - presumably you're with the NICEIC or SELECT if working in Scotland. Ask them the question if you dont know the answer?

 

[ipf]

If i do an eicr before i change a consumer unit WHY do i still have to do an installation cert after changing the board?

Original Post.
Something tells me you should have put a 'WHY' in there.
The original question was fully answered in #2.

 

[dksanders]

What regulation says you must do an installation cert after changing a board?
Good practice guide says you should do it but im only asking why i should Have to do an installation cert after i have done an eicr which is more thorough and i havent installed any circuits.

You've installed a CU or had you forgotten that.......

You've also changed all the terminations, possibly introduced a fault by nicking insulation, mixing wires (we've all done it no matter how sure we've not) so you have to be able to prove that you left the installation in a safe condition, you've changed the protective devices including RCDs so now need to record and certify the new circuit values, RCD operating times etc.

Sorry but there's no getting away from it, at minimum I always do resistance insulation tests so I know what faults are likely to exist before introducing RCDs/RCBOs as part of the new CU, and then a full EICR after the CU installation. All of which is covered in my price for the job.

 

[ipf]

You've installed a CU or had you forgotten that.......


Sorry but there's no getting away from it, at minimum I always do resistance insulation tests so I know what faults are likely to exist before introducing RCDs/RCBOs as part of the new CU, and then a full EICR after the CU installation. All of which is covered in my price for the job.

Am I missing something? Do you do a completion cert and a conditions report?

 

[Pete999]

Am I missing something? Do you do a completion cert and a conditions report?

I think the problem is ipf is that, most do a few tests to make sure that after the CU has been changed there will be no embarrassing issues of the recently addition of RCDs have not produced any unwanted tripping.

The problem as I see it is once you have changed the CU you do an EIC on the work you have done. i,e, change the CU, that leaves the existing circuits IR tested at the least but nothing else tested, continuity, Zs, R1+R2 where applicable, cpc continuity and main bonding, although some will question the bonding issue, so the question is, how do we approach a CU change?

The consensus is an EICR is the best way forward prior to a CU change, if however the client won't agree to paying for an EICR prior to a CU change, then an EIC for the CU change is all the client will get, I feel a change in the method/rules is in need of clarification, mind you there will be some who disagree with this, hence my statement of the need for a rule change.

 

[ipf]

I think the problem is ipf is that, most do a few tests to make sure that after the CU has been changed there will be no embarrassing issues of the recently addition of RCDs have not produced any unwanted tripping.

The problem as I see it is once you have changed the CU you do an EIC on the work you have done. i,e, change the CU, that leaves the existing circuits IR tested at the least but nothing else tested, continuity, Zs, R1+R2 where applicable, cpc continuity and main bonding, although some will question the bonding issue, so the question is, how do we approach a CU change?

The consensus is an EICR is the best way forward prior to a CU change, if however the client won't agree to paying for an EICR prior to a CU change, then an EIC for the CU change is all the client will get, I feel a change in the method/rules is in need of clarification, mind you there will be some who disagree with this, hence my statement of the need for a rule change.

I know, Pete. It's just whether they want to pay for a conditions report or not. I've done the odd board change where they don't...so it's a case of noting on the cert that an EICR is recommended for the existing installation.

 

[JK-Electrical]

Even if you did copy the EICR results you would still need to issue an EIC and building control notification for the works carried out

Up here in Scotland it isn't always necessary to notify Building Control of electrical work that has been carried-out. While most electrical work carried-out in a flat requires a building warrant, this isn't the case with a house.

Guidance on electrical work not requiring a warrant (Domestic) - http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Built-Environment/Building/Building-standards/publications/glf2

 

[JK-Electrical]

Should that person be touching electrical work, probably not.
Is there legislation to stop him, definitely not.

Hopefully this sorry situation will change sooner rather than later in Scotland should the Scottish Government get its finger out of its arse and introduce the much-needed legislation that SELECT have been campaigning for.

There are far too many unqualified cowboys and inexperienced, under-qualified boys operating as electricians up here and a weed-out is long overdue. The question of whether or not one of these numptys will end-up killing someone is one of when rather than if.

SELECT Present Case for Regulation to Scottish Government - SELECT - Scotland's Electrical Trade Association - http://www.select.org.uk/select-present-case-regulation-scottish-government/

 

[Octopus]

Part P has done little or nothing to improve electrical installations in England or Wales, so I can't see it helping in Scotland.

 

[delano]

Why are you doing the eicr first?

You do an EICR first because you should do an inspection and test of the installation and remedial work if necessary, before a new CCU is fitted. The EIC is used for notification, using test results after the board change.

 

[Octopus]

You do an EICR first because you should do an inspection and test of the installation and remedial work if necessary, before a new CCU is fitted.

Best you read all the thread ............ I've clarified my views on this and an EICR is not always necessary....

 

[Pete999]

You do an EICR first because you should do an inspection and test of the installation and remedial work if necessary, before a new CCU is fitted. The EIC is used for notification, using test results after the board change.

Would be a good starting point , but what if the client wont pay for an EICR, just wants a new CU (a daft scenario I know) I would always ensure I did an IP test at the least to prove to myself that there will be no surprising RCD trips to make my day into a bad day. The EIC will be for the work the Electrician has done i,e, change the CU.

 

[ipf]

You do an EICR first because you should do an inspection and test of the installation and remedial work if necessary, before a new CCU is fitted. The EIC is used for notification, using test results after the board change.

Wrong. For starters, there is no guarantee that those results will be the same (due to alterations, maybe). If a client wants a change of CU only, that's the job, not remedial work recommended. Don't forget that, by installing rcd protection, at the very least, the safety of the installation is being improved.

 

[Octopus]

This is included on all my CU change estimates:

"NB: If problems are detected during the fuse board change additional work may be required. Such issues and associated costs will be discussed with you, prior to being implemented"

Never had any comments or complaints about it

 

[ipf]

This is included on all my CU change estimates:

"NB: If problems are detected during the fuse board change additional work may be required. Such issues and associated costs will be discussed with you, prior to being implemented"

Never had any comments or complaints about it

Goes without saying IMO (on here, that is). Anything serious is either obvious or is going to be found during testing, anyway.