replacement of 2391

[stanleyben]

hey just wanted some help which is the course to do now they have stopped 2391 7many thanks

 

[Matthew168]

2394 and 2395 new equivalents

 

[Spark92]

Got to do both???

 

[james_t87]

Got to do both???

Yes to have the equivalent

 

[Spark92]

Are they expensive ???

 

[james_t87]

Cost me 800 to do both

 

[Matthew168]

Cost me £700 to do both in December last year

 

[darren1974]

EAL now have the 4337 and 4338 Inspection & Testing Qualifications (JIB Approved). All online exams and open book guidance note 3.

 

[sparkymalarky]

http://www.electriciansforums.net/e...2-new-city-guilds-qualifications-courses.html

see this previous thread for more info fella's.

 

[NickD]

Got to do both???

Depends what you want them for. 2394 is testing and inspecting your own installations. 2395 is testing and inspecting (NOT certificating - big difference) installations you haven't installed (electrical installation condition reporting, periodic inspections). That's my understanding anyway.

Apparently NAPIT do their own homebrew versions which are open-book exams and which they themselves accept. How others may views them I don't know. Inclined to be sceptical/cynical on that point.

 

[sparkymalarky]

Depends what you want them for. 2394 is testing and inspecting your own installations. 2395 is testing and inspecting (NOT certificating - big difference) installations you haven't installed (electrical installation condition reporting, periodic inspections). That's my understanding anyway.

What a load of waffle. City & Guilds 2394 - Level 3 Award in the Initial Verification and Certification of Electrical InstallationsCity & Guilds 2395 - Level 3 Award in the Periodic Inspection, Testing and Certification of Electrical Installations’

Please read the previous thread and the enclosed link before making assumptions.

 

[NickD]

I think the broad-brush thrust (oo err missus) of what I said is right. 2394 is initial verification, i.e. test inspection and certification of new work - this will mostly be "your own work" because you did it with your own fair hand. It may also be you are testing new work on behalf of the (presumably competent) installer as part of a larger contract or organisation or whatever. Obviously some people do nothing but T&I work. But either way the OSG is clear that, quote, "Under no circumstances should a third party issue a certificate for installation work they have not undertaken" (G2.3 p152). Admittedly this is because the installer always issues the certificate, with the inspector as a signatory.

2395 is for electrical installation condition reporting / periodic reporting of existing commissioned installations. OSG G3.1 p152, "The EICR does not certify anything" and "must not be issued to certify new electrical work". Read the sign-off declaration in Section G of the EICR model form. The word "certify" does not appear. Your are not certifying anything. Neither the form nor schedules are called, or have the status of, certificates.

Won't bore you with the legal status of certification but the clue is in the word itself "certi-ficate", as in makes safe or makes sure.

 

[sparkymalarky]

Ok well I will admit I am wrong on that point NickD. :49:But you still got the name of the course wrong which made me think you weren't sure on the matter. lol. Must keep all that in mind anyway, grey area that I wasn't sure on.

 

[rmc86uk]

So if you work on a site where there have been twenty different blokes do the install and you have been chosen to test it you then take a step back and say, "I can't test that because it wasn't installed with my own hands?"

 

[NickD]

Ok well I will admit I am wrong on that point NickD. :49:But you still got the name of the course wrong which made me think you weren't sure on the matter. lol. Must keep all that in mind anyway, grey area that I wasn't sure on.

Big respect. Takes a real man/woman/other non-homo-sapiens sentient lifeforms who might get offended by not being included to admit they're mistaken. I wasn't naming the courses, just broad-brush describing them, maybe should have made that clearer. And I definitely muddied the waters by not being clear that "your own work" could include the work of your organisation or even separate organisations contracted to do the job as a whole.