Test failed due to missing RCD | Page 15 | on ElectriciansForums
Guest viewing is limited

Discuss Test failed due to missing RCD in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
14
Reaction score
9
Location
Hornchurch
Hi All
Recently joined the forum to ask for some information.
I recently bought a flat to let. I was advised by the letting agent to get the electrics tested, although not a legal requirement. The test was carried out by their electrical contractor. He failed the test due to the fuse board not having an RCD fitted. The fuse board is the original board fitted in 2003 when the flats where built. There has been no mods or circuits added to the system and everything is working as it should. I paid £348.00 for the test and the RCD to be installed. I have since been told that the test should not have failed due to the lack of the RCD. Have I been stitched up.
Any comments gratefully recieved

Peter
 
It is this type of lazy approach to sparking that bothers me. Itnis not a given fact that just installing RCDs ‘make it safer’.

The ‘RCD everything’ approach without no design or thought behind it is not what we ahould be doing. We could just say ‘wire everything in SWA makes it safer’. Why do we not do this? Because we need to ise our skill and interpretation to determine if these extra precautions are actually needed.

In this instance a safe installation has been made less safe by installing an ‘up-front’ RCD which is not to Regs.

i wouldn't say it was less safe, but the inconvenience of 1 out, all out , is not compliant with current regs. ( loss of all lighting, freezers etc., due to an unrelated fault). reason that i split our garage feed from a non-RCD way on a hi-integrity CU ( 3 freezers and fridges. outside socket is RCD socket.).
 
Hi All
Recently joined the forum to ask for some information.
I recently bought a flat to let. I was advised by the letting agent to get the electrics tested, although not a legal requirement. The test was carried out by their electrical contractor. He failed the test due to the fuse board not having an RCD fitted. The fuse board is the original board fitted in 2003 when the flats where built. There has been no mods or circuits added to the system and everything is working as it should. I paid £348.00 for the test and the RCD to be installed. I have since been told that the test should not have failed due to the lack of the RCD. Have I been stitched up.
Any comments gratefully recieved

Peter
Hi Peter
I haven't read all of the posts on here so please excuse if this has been covered already.
I'm fairly sure it is indeed a legal requirement on change of user to have inspection carried out.
The code should be C3 for no rcd for socket outlets.C3 for no rcd on bathroom circuits and C3 for no rcd for circuits with buried cables.
The cost of the I.R. is about right slightly cheap if anything...The price for the 1 rcd (plus presumably an installation cert or minor works cert to cover this) Was a little cheeky. Just make sure you get ALL the paperwork.
 
This has turned into a farce.
Firstly unless the original flat is ground floor a code 3 would be appropriate for lack of RCD protection to any circuit.... unless SB is not in place in bathrooms , that and lack of additional protection to sockets which may supply equipment outdoors would warrant a code 2.
The only issue here is that as a remedial measure the electrician has introduced another non-compliance, which should itself warrant a code 3.
It has been said that some would not even mention an up front 30ma RCD on an EICR. A recent ground floor flat that I tested had just that, and I gave it a code 2 as the flat was occupied by an elderly lady and the CU was out of reach at ceiling level.
 
This has turned into a farce.
Firstly unless the original flat is ground floor a code 3 would be appropriate for lack of RCD protection to any circuit.... unless SB is not in place in bathrooms , that and lack of additional protection to sockets which may supply equipment outdoors would warrant a code 2.
The only issue here is that as a remedial measure the electrician has introduced another non-compliance, which should itself warrant a code 3.
It has been said that some would not even mention an up front 30ma RCD on an EICR. A recent ground floor flat that I tested had just that, and I gave it a code 2 as the flat was occupied by an elderly lady and the CU was out of reach at ceiling level.
Some members on here have not taken into account that there could be a whole range of different occupiers.
 
I think the IET have totally forgotten about

K eep
I t
S imple
S tupid

The problem with the IET is that Engineers write this carp, Engineers proof read this Carp and Joe Public and the sparking community adopt different interpretations.
 
Is having a single RCD that never gets tested safer than not having any RCD at all?
Is having a single RCD that never gets tested safer than having separate RCBOs that never get tested?
If RCDs are so much safer, why are they no an option for cables above ceilings and below floors?
presumably because above ceilings and below floors, the cables have been installed deep enough to not be subject to nail or screw penetration.
 
You are more likely to nail a cable in the wall through hanging objects on said walls, than damaging cables which should be installed deep enough through and above the ceiling
 
You are more likely to nail a cable in the wall through hanging objects on said walls, than damaging cables which should be installed deep enough through and above the ceiling
Of course, no one has ever just notched the top of a joist to run cables, or used an existing notch for pipework.
All joists and battens are greater than 100mm, no one’s ever laid a wooden floor on a concrete slab, or fixed new plasterboard over existing lath and plaster using 1” battens.
 
Of course, no one has ever just notched the top of a joist to run cables, or used an existing notch for pipework.
All joists and battens are greater than 100mm, no one’s ever laid a wooden floor on a concrete slab, or fixed new plasterboard over existing lath and plaster using 1” battens.
One site I was involved with back in the 70s the flats had a concrete slab, with roofing battonslaid, not fixed then normal floor boards fitted normally, wiring laid in the voids between the battons, I didn't stay long on that site, decided that sort of botch was not for me.
 

Reply to Test failed due to missing RCD in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

News and Offers from Sponsors

  • Sticky
  • Article
Wicked I've just actually looked through it and it's very smart. Some good stuff in it. There's a tile association company that do a magazine...
Replies
2
Views
353
  • Article
OFFICIAL SPONSORS These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then...
Replies
0
Views
320
  • Article
Hi everyone, Another weekend, another sale! Get ready for colder days with Haverland Radiators, combining efficiency with modern design. Keep...
Replies
0
Views
368

Similar threads

L
  • Question
My Understanding is the 6 Months interval is IET Guidance and this wording is incorporated onto the label which is a requirement in 514.12.2 where...
Replies
9
Views
606
I usually put something like this To assess compliance with BS7671 for continued safe operation (5 year periodical inspection)
Replies
8
Views
414

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

YOUR Unread Posts

This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top