sockets not on rcd

[growler]

I went to a house the other day where the lady had a new cooker installed with a new feed. The spark had done here a new board. I was just being nosy and noticed there was only 1 rcd and one of the rings was on the non rcd side. there were six circuits in total. Im trying to figure out why this has been done. the homeowner wasnt around to ask. My spark mate at work reckons maybe the rcd picked up a fault and the customer didnt wanna fork out for the time / hassle of finding it. so it wasnt put on rcd. is this acceptable? is it also acceptable to only use 1 rcd? Maybe once he found a fault he couldnt convert the board to split load and non rcd? thanks in advance!

 

[telectrix]

are you sure the non RCD side wasn't RCBOs? if not, then i would question whether the "spark" who'd fitted the board knew what he was doing.

 

[Westy-1]

Im pretty sure all sockets must be on an RCD but I guess if the customer doesn't want any time or money spent on finding the fault there is nothing you can do!

I will be interested to see what people on the forum say about this!

 

[telectrix]

well, if the guy's a muppet, fitting a new board without first testing for IR faults, it's his own fault , so he should fix the fault.

 

[Heisenberg]

Im pretty sure all sockets must be on an RCD but I guess if the customer doesn't want any time or money spent on finding the fault there is nothing you can do!

I will be interested to see what people on the forum say about this!

It's not acceptable in my opinion, but is often a consequence of someone doing a board change without doing any testing first, and then getting a nasty surprise when re-energizing the installation.
I also don't think having the whole house on one RCD is what I would call good practice

 

[needasparks]

You don't get much for £150 these days lol. bit of a theme here eh.

We all know private cash jobs happen all the time, countless times you here people talking about their electrician is retired ex leccy board. It just gives us more work later on, shame the customer has to pay twice for the same job though.

 

[ezzzekiel]

cant see the problem without any prior testing - the faults are there regardless and need to be corrected so pretest or dont but sort problems and if the client isnt informed of any follow up work then its on your shoulders.


its more a case of swapped board then couldnt fix faults as didnt know how or has no test gear, im sure vast majority of sparks will find and fix majority of faults found in an hour or so.

 

[Westy-1]

It's not acceptable in my opinion, but is often a consequence of someone doing a board change with doing any testing first, and then getting a nasty surprise when re-energizing the installation.
I also don't think having the whole house on one RCD is what I would call good practice

Split over 2 RCDs of course! I wasn't very clear! Cant be having everything going pitch black if a lamp blows!

 

[growler]

yeah i just saw this and didnt want to get involved. my mate at work (who is part p) just threw me a bit with his comment about if the customer didnt want to pay for the fault to be fixed. but your right the fault should have been picked up before hand.

 

[Richard Burns]

Doesn't comply with the regulations at all, if the customer does not want to pay for repairing the fault then you can't connect the circuit or you leave the old board in place!

 

[a1guvner]

What is that crazy couple of words again, oh yes thats it "Responsibility""Certification"

 

[growler]

Went back to this house again where my mate is working, had another look at the board and the downstairs sockets are def not rcd protected! The homeowner was unaware that the spark had done this but can remember him taking alot of front plates off because 'something was wrong'. He even changed a single socket into a double hoping this would clear the fault?? The guy is part p and he issued a cert. the owner was annoyed about this when i pointed this out to him because he wasnt told. obviously this pretty much defeats the object of forking out for a cu change.

 

[Octopus]

Went back to this house again where my mate is working, had another look at the board and the downstairs sockets are def not rcd protected! The homeowner was unaware that the spark had done this but can remember him taking alot of front plates off because 'something was wrong'. He even changed a single socket into a double hoping this would clear the fault?? The guy is part p and he issued a cert. the owner was annoyed about this when i pointed this out to him because he wasnt told. obviously this pretty much defeats the object of forking out for a cu change.

Did you see the certificate, that might make an interesting read!

 

[growler]

Did you see the certificate, that might make an interesting read!

na i didnt. apparently he was bulgarian though

 

[GLENNSPARK]

Went back to this house again where my mate is working, had another look at the board and the downstairs sockets are def not rcd protected! The homeowner was unaware that the spark had done this but can remember him taking alot of front plates off because 'something was wrong'. He even changed a single socket into a double hoping this would clear the fault?? The guy is part p and he issued a cert. the owner was annoyed about this when i pointed this out to him because he wasnt told. obviously this pretty much defeats the object of forking out for a cu change.

and just out of interest...what were the earthing arrangements here and was both earthing and bonding upto the current edition of BS7671?....