PIR code help please

[telectrix]

i'm going to get shot for this but anyway. IMO metal fittings and switches on a non-earthed lighting circuit are not a real and immediate danger until a fault occurs, but it's code1

 

[Deleted member 9648]

i'm going to get shot for this but anyway. IMO metal fittings and switches on a non-earthed lighting circuit are not a real and immediate danger until a fault occurs, but it's code1

I wouldnt shoot you for that one,earth faults are common on lighting circuits to say the least so a danger could arise at any time....I go with the recommended 2, which still means an unsatisfactory,but it is the inspectors call in the end.

 

[malcolmsanford]

This coding system is the most inane and toothless thing the regs have done, They are even changing it again in the updated edition to just 3 codes this time.

Get a room full of electricians and they will all come up with different codes for different observations, but unfortunately there isn't a better or simpler way to do this, or is there? any ideas

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Yep....'discussions' over what code to apply are constant......but I cant think of a better way of getting across to a non electrical recipient of a PIR what is required. The code based on the inspectors point of view are always going to result in inconsistancies though.

 

[malcolmsanford]

Yes but after listing 100,s of observations, you would find one that was not on it.

Also a clear one for me is blanks missing on a DB. I was doing a PIR a few years back and missing blanks on a 3 phase board as a code 1. I called a another sparks I worked with sometimes and asked if he had any MEM blanks. When he came over with them, he asked why I coded it a 1, obvious to me, it was. He told me he would have coded it a 2 as the board had a 4 screws to secure the cover and a use of tool would be needed to open it, a code 2 for him.

 

[IQ Electrical]

If in a domestic situation, with a consumer unit in an easily accessible position, I'd record missing blanks as a code 1.

If however it's in a factory/commercial installation at high level or within a locked mains cupboard, I'd go with a code 2.

The ESC codes are there as a guide but really, we are carrying out a mini risk assessment every time we allocate a code to a defect.

For me, a code 1 is an IMMEDIATE danger like an exposed live part, signs of overload etc.

A code 2 is potential for danger-something else has to happen before the danger becomes immediate.

That's how I apply my code logic but it is YOUR report and YOUR name on it!

 

[jedisparks]

Thanks to all that have replied.

 

[TPES]

I dont want to start a new thread for this but just wodered what you'd code a socket that was fixed upside down under a kitchen worktop with washing machine pluged in?

Plug top is not sitting flush into socket as the cable and downward force is lifting it out slightly..Would you code it?

 

[malcolmsanford]

Would be just as easy to put it the right way up and be done surely, unless there is something stopping you doing that .

 

[TPES]

Would be just as easy to put it the right way up and be done surely, unless there is something stopping you doing that .

Yeah thats what i would do if i got the remidial work, But its just a PIR at moment.. just coding.

 

[nickblake]

I agree with malcome , you do remove sockets and switches to inspect the wiring during an inspection do that one and fit it correctly

 

[TPES]

I agree with malcome , you do remove sockets and switches to inspect the wiring during an inspection do that one and fit it correctly

Yes I agree with you also, but this is cable clipped along the underside of the kitchen worktop, into a patress fixed upside down with a 13a single socket.. I'm not there to be doing any remedial work. Pulling it back and fixing it correctly back on the wall.. I'm just reporting what I see and wondered what you might code if any

 

[robsparky1975]

I would probably put it down as code 4 (does not comply),in the periodic tick boxes (connection of accessories i think),or something of that kind,this would sound as though it is not

 

[r081n]

Late to respond to the machine question I know but my take on it is that the code should be a 1.

The rational behiind this what if one the the two items causes the protective device to trip? The second item will also cut out with possible consequences. Conversely when the protective device is reactivated after the fault is fixed it may be that both connect circuits then cause operation.

Not being completely ofay with the installation these are just observations.

 

[IQ Electrical]

Code 1 as in 'immediate danger' eg. exposed live part etc?

That configuration will in all likelihood run without incident for as long as it is needed, code 2 for me, leaning towards 4 if isolators etc labelled to suit.