Missing grommets

[Electwix]

How would you code a missing grommet?

 

[Electwix]

C3 plastic face plate ? C2 metal face plate ?

 

[loz2754]

I would code it according to the level of potential danger it poses. If the cable is visibly chafed I might C2 it.
If there is no damage and the wires cannot move because they are bedded in the plaster, I wouldn't code it at all. (Though I may make a comment on it in case someone coming after me thinks I'm blind and should have noted it!!) The face plate would make no difference.

 

[telectrix]

i have to code it C1..... i need the work. (smiley).

 

[jackhammerJIM]

C3 plastic face plate ? C2 metal face plate ?

I cant see how either option would affect the coding ?

 

[Flanders]

I would code it according to the level of potential danger it poses. If the cable is visibly chafed I might C2 it.
If there is no damage and the wires cannot move because they are bedded in the plaster, I wouldn't code it at all. (Though I may make a comment on it in case someone coming after me thinks I'm blind and should have noted it!!) The face plate would make no difference.

I do the same but always wondered if the manufactures instructions( if such instructions exists) say that grommets must be used for the cable entry

 

[ChrisElectrical88]

I’d C3 just so it’s noted I’ve seen it. However if the cables aren’t secured and basic insulation is passing through, c2.

 

[cliffed]

We had this concern with the Niceic man,years ago,he always picked up on grommets & ID on switch cables.
We were told off like naughty school kids,the flush box knock outs are not that sharp to cause damage,& not using grommet is not detrimental to the cable or install.
Would make a note on Eicr,agree C2 if basic insulation can be seen.
Theres so much install out there without grommets,ID & Even green sleeving ,now that’s definitely a C2, or is it.

 

[Welchyboy1]

Wouldn’t you just slip a grommet in place if you felt it was serious enough to warrant a C2 rather than fail an EICR because of such a trivial Item?

 

[suffolkspark]

Am I the only one that wouldn't even code this? I mean if the cable is all smashed up I would, but otherwise the t/e already has its layer of mechanical protection

 

[Spoon]

As I've mentioned in another post, I don't have any grommets in my back boxes.
@loz2754 pretty much sums up the answer in his post #3.

 

[DefyG]

On the assumption that the earthing is adequate, accessory and ocd/rcd are all ok , a missing grommet poses no threat to the user of the installation as the OCD/RCD will operate if contact between conductor and box ever occur.
I usually just note it as an observation in line with BPG4/5 - pg 16
'Items worthy of note that do not warrant a classification code (These comments should be recorded on the EICR in the observations section)'

 

[Doomed]

I have (very rarely) seen cables damaged by a lack of a grommet - once by a front door which over the years must of caused the cable to move minutely when the door was slammed and eventually caused an issue and once by plugs being pushed in and out.
Because of this I C3 them as there is a potential risk.

 

[DefyG]

Because of this I C3 them as there is a potential risk.

I agree that some seismic activity might cause some movement but what 'really' is the danger to the user as the ocd/rcd should activate long before a user is exposed to 'live' parts!

 

[Spoon]

I have (very rarely) seen cables damaged by a lack of a grommet - once by a front door which over the years must of caused the cable to move minutely when the door was slammed and eventually caused an issue and once by plugs being pushed in and out.
Because of this I C3 them as there is a potential risk.

Must have been a poorly fitted backbox for a plug being pushed in & out to damage the cable. Knockout in backboxes are not even sharp.