So AFDD then for all Landlords???

[Vortigern]

I was just thinking if NAPIT are coding no RCD on lighting, to comply with the new LL law/S.I. as C2 then presumably we would also have to say absence of AFDD is likewise C2? And how about SPD as well. This surely can't be right, making regs retrospective.

 

[radiohead]

AFDD's and SPD's in dwellings are not required, only recommended. No code is appropriate.
RCD protection to lighting circuits is now required, but should not attract a code 2 except perhaps in special locations. NAPIT are wrong to suggest blanket code 2.

 

[Ian1981]

AFDD’s are a recommendation only, SPD’s are not a recommendation in dwellings , they are required unless the cost therin does not justify such protection.

 

[littlespark]

What about metal consumer units? Some poor (huh!) landlord has his property rewired 5 years ago, got a nice plastic CU....
Future proofed by having everything off rcd.

Sorry, got to come out.

 

[DPG]

Napit are going to cause a lot of people to have work done that they will not need. Which will help all the cowboys out there, who won't fully inform the customer.

 

[ChrisElectrical88]

Almost makes me happy to be with the NIC ?

 

[nicebutdim]

Out of curiosity; are Napit members expected to adhere to coding according to codebreakers or is it intended as a guide?

Seems like a relevant question if the book contradicts other guidance.

 

[radiohead]

AFDD’s are a recommendation only, SPD’s are not a recommendation in dwellings , they are required unless the cost therin does not justify such protection.

Translated that means they are not required but are recommended.

 

[Vortigern]

The thing is, as we have seen, people are already whipping out C2 for LLs on this issue. Surely artistic liecence (purposefully mispelt) will soon include metalclad CU, AFDD, SPD and a partridge in a pear tree. I personally believe it is a mistake in the new S.I. to insist on 18th edition compliance in fact nonsense to be clear. So when the 19th comes out in December (I prophesy) we still have to ensure compliance with an obsolete version of regs. really!

 

[Welchyboy1]

Out of curiosity; are Napit members expected to adhere to coding according to codebreakers or is it intended as a guide?

Seems like a relevant question if the book contradicts other guidance.

Dont panic quite yet

 

[Vortigern]

I think we all know that NAPIT and NICEIC et al do give out advice which is no way even regulatory or required. It is the case that it is up to the judgement of the person doing the EICR. Although I must say it is a good book and a good reference to sort of compare my thinking with what was no doubt a team effort of a few people who know their job. The regs refs. in there are handy as well for filling in reports.

 

[Dartlec]

Don't know the answer to this one, but has an eicr ever been tested in court? As in an incident/fire/whatever and the contents of an EICR been used against the report creator?

There are some obvious issues which aren't up for much debate, but there's a lot of grey area where the inspectors judgement is considered more important than the 'regulations'. I suspect if you got 5 electrical 'experts' together to discuss a topic you'd rarely get 100% agreement on anything.

 

[Welchyboy1]

I think we all know that NAPIT and NICEIC et al do give out advice which is no way even regulatory or required. It is the case that it is up to the judgement of the person doing the EICR. Although I must say it is a good book and a good reference to sort of compare my thinking with what was no doubt a team effort of a few people who know their job. The regs refs. in there are handy as well for filling in reports.

Yes i bought it for the same reason, although i found a few of the codings on the extreme side and against the general consensus of the industry which is only going to cause more conflicting issues than its claiming to solve.

It seemed unless the issue is extremely minor(e.g. Missing switch wire sleeving) its mostly a code 2 regardless

A bit of a cop out/--- covering exercise if you ask me!

Me personally, I will be working on the guidance of the electrical safety first guide primarily but like you say its good for reference and covers more examples than most guides.

 

[AJshep]

NAPIT aren't suggesting that you code no RCD protection o lighting circuits a C2?

Quote from the Codebreaker book.
"Circuit supplying luminaires in a domestic dwelling,class 1 fittings, No 30mA RCD protection C3.

 

[Markyd]

AFDD’s are a recommendation only, SPD’s are not a recommendation in dwellings , they are required unless the cost therin does not justify such protection.

WRONG...Recommendation only, if the client says no then no