Is a borrowed earth allowed?

[a-z electrics]

Done an EICR yday on an old house and all ok apart from 2 issues..
1) 32A cooker circuit had high resistance pec continuity (over2kohms) ALTHO it did buzz out on my voltage probes. Hence not able to get a Zs reading and no rcd tripping. The dual rcd consumer unit was fitted 10 yrs ago and those test readings all available and fine. Kitchen was refitted 3 yrs ago and no docs available so they extended original cooker cable prob from the switch which is now tiled over somewhere.
.. I've put in an earth wire link from an immediately adjacent rfc socket into the cooker switch and this solves this problem.
Question .. is this ok as a permanent solution if i label up what ive done?
2) lowish IR readings 1.75M L-E and N-E on light circuits and one rfc but possibly in hindsight due to some bulbs, fan and appliances still plugged in. Could this account for it?

 

[buzzlightyear]

It is as BL says like borrowing a neutral, as soon as that link is disconnected there could be a potential difference between the two earth conductors.
Big problem with temporary repairs is that they have a nasty habit of become permanent repairs!

Different scenario Buzz.

how can it be a different . are you saying its ok to borrow a earth knowing if their is fault to earth It want clear quicker. IMO the op needs to ring his scam and get clarification.

 

[Midwest]

As some of the more experienced have said... It is fine to use a CPC common to two or more circuits, and it complies with a regulation 543.1.2 (as long as it's CSA is sufficient).

I do find it worrying when members, some are even trusted members, give the wrong advice and give it out so quickly without giving proper thought. We all get it wrong at times, but at least lets give it some thought before we get it wrong.

Thats told me then. Still think its so wrong though.

 

[Andy-1960]

I agree with Westy, the circuits cannot now be independently isolated, anyone working on the RFC in the future could potentially get a shock from the cooker circuit in the event of a fault on the cooker.
It is as BL says like borrowing a neutral, as soon as that link is disconnected there could be a potential difference between the two earth conductors.
Big problem with temporary repairs is that they have a nasty habit of become permanent repairs!
Also, what has now been done must surely screw the test results for the RFC, so how do you document that in the EICR?
Correct thing to do would be to isolate the cooker circuit and label it saying it is not to be used until remedial action has been carried out and document that to the client.

I agree with Westy.

I meant Midwest... sorry Westy!

 

[Midwest]

I meant Midwest... sorry Westy!

He needs to change his name. Something more befitting a Moderator.

 

[Andy-1960]

I agree with Westy.

I meant Midwest... sorry Westy!

 

[Midwest]

Who said that

 

[Deleted member 9648]

It is permitted for a protective conductor to be common to two or more circuits, I do not have the BBB to hand, only the BRB....where it is 543.1.2.
Edit...sorry, I see that's already been said.

 

[Nigel]

Nothing different than a conduit sytem being used as a cpc for multiple circuits.

 

[ruston]

I didn't like to point out the error

Not like you . Promotion has mellowed you.

 

[Midwest]

Nothing different than a conduit sytem being used as a cpc for multiple circuits.

But it ain't a conduit system, its in someone's house.

So so so wrong.

 

[Midwest]

Not like you . Promotion has mellowed you.

He is coming over a bit mellow at the moment. How long before his moustache slips?

 

[ruston]

When Elsparko comes back.

 

[buzzlightyear]

He is coming over a bit mellow at the moment. How long before his moustache slips?

YEAP .

 

[westward10]

I meant Midwest... sorry Westy!

He needs to change his name. Something more befitting a Moderator.

Open to suggestions providing it doesn't contain the word head and other body parts.

 

[DieselShunter]

I agree with Westy, the circuits cannot now be independently isolated, anyone working on the RFC in the future could potentially get a shock from the cooker circuit in the event of a fault on the cooker.
It is as BL says like borrowing a neutral, as soon as that link is disconnected there could be a potential difference between the two earth conductors.
Big problem with temporary repairs is that they have a nasty habit of become permanent repairs!
Also, what has now been done must surely screw the test results for the RFC, so how do you document that in the EICR?
Correct thing to do would be to isolate the cooker circuit and label it saying it is not to be used until remedial action has been carried out and document that to the client.

Borrowing a CPC is not the same as borrowing a Neutral. The Neutral is a live conductor whereas the CPC is not.