Which electrician's advice should I follow?

[Flatowner]

Dear Electricians

Scenario: privately owned and occupied flat, not tenanted.

Electrician 1 - Completed an EICR report. Recommended upgrading the consumer unit to a metal unit
Electrician 2 - Was concerned at readings achieved on electrician 1's EICR and informed me that the readings did not make sense unless electrician 1 disconnected everything and stripped everything down. Recommended not replacing consumer unit, but instead move some of the circuits on to the RCD, some on to an RCBOS.

Are both electricians correct please?

 

[brianmoooore]

May be wrong, but without further info., I'd say Sparkky 1 is a chancer generating unnecessary work.
Sadly, very common.
Where is the consumer unit located, and is it a make that the correct spares are available for?

 

[Flatowner]

May be wrong, but without further info., I'd say Sparkky 1 is a chancer generating unnecessary work.
Sadly, very common.
Where is the consumer unit located, and is it a make that the correct spares are available for?

Thank you Brian. The consumer unit is located in the hallway. I've attached a picture.

 

[westward10]

Can you repost the picture but cover the company name.

 

[brianmoooore]

There's something very odd about that CU. The circuits that are RCD protected are the ones that leasr need it, while the ones that need it the most, aren't.
If RCBOs are still available for that board, then rearranging the circuits, plus two or three RCBOs will make that compliant.

 

[Dartlec]

It's possible that both can be right in the sense of both having solutions to problems that exist.

However, it sounds like Electrician 2 has taken more time to consider the issue and come up with a cost effective solution to the need to comply.

There are some readings (Insulation Resistance readings for example) that on an existing installation will almost never all be the same high reading (200, >299, >999 depending on tester) unless every thing has been unplugged, all lamps removed, and any USB sockets or fittings with neons bypassed. This is almost never practical on a 'lived in' EICR, so putting those figures in is usually a sign of fakery...

That consumer unit is not particularly old, and likely serviceable - RCBOs are available for it if they are needed on certain circuits.

Having said that, there are sometimes benefits to a full upgrade now, depending on the type of equipment you have installed (For example a new board would probably contain Surge Protection, and a type of RCBO that is better at detecting faults when newer appliances are installed).

A good electrician should be able to explain the options available and help you to choose the one that you are most comfortable with.

 

[Flatowner]

Thank you all. I've reposted a picture of the consumer unit with company details covered (although the sticker on the unit is very old and not related to my questions).

 

[Soi disant]

Electrician 1 Recommended upgrading the consumer unit to a metal unit

Recommended as in "C3, Improvement Recommended", or "C2, Potentially Dangerous"?

 

[Flatowner]

Recommended as in "C3, Improvement Recommended", or "C2, Potentially Dangerous"?

Thanks, I've attached pictures, with electrician details removed.

 

[Dartlec]

There's something very odd about that CU. The circuits that are RCD protected are the ones that leasr need it, while the ones that need it the most, aren't.
If RCBOs are still available for that board, then rearranging the circuits, plus two or three RCBOs will make that compliant.

I've seen another picture on here recently like that - odd choice of RCD protection, My guess is that it's not a ground floor flat, so they decided no chance of mobile equipment being used - but not sure why they decided to RCD the immersion.

Maybe a particular new build company's policy because the water heater they installed (Megaflo maybe?) requires RCD protection in the installation instructions?

 

[timhoward]

There are several intriguing things about this one:
Very strange CU layout as someone commented above.
One of the most complete schedules of test I've ever seen. If they actually did all that fair play. Hmmm.
R1+R2 of socket circuits seem to equal r1 in all cases. Bit odd.
(Combi Boiler circuit, most intriguing)

With disclaimer that I haven't seen under the cover, I think what I would do is label and pull all circuits out of CU, checking lengths, and reconfigure it with far fewer non-RCD circuits and many more RCD circuits. That would solve the RCD problem, though there's then a lot on a single RCD. I might therefore put a couple of RCBO's in for lighting on the left hand side as a nod towards regulation 531.3.2.
Then change the bathroom light and all defects are resolved as per the original report.

I've just re-read your first post to check the actual question, and (honestly) completely independently come up with the same answer as electrician 2.
Electrician 1 could have in mind that most of the work reconfiguring it would be needed for a board change anyway, but this would add to your costs.
I wouldn't say either is wrong, but good customer service would be to explain the choices and assist you making an informed choice.

 

[Flatowner]

Thank you all. I'm very grateful for your time and advice.

 

[Dartlec]

Thanks, I've attached pictures, with electrician details removed.

IMO the Code C2s are a bit too broad in lack of RCD protection, especially for a non rented flat. The one's that might matter most would be bathroom circuits, and any socket circuits that might feed outside equipment via extension leads (not sure what floor the flat is?).

There are some dubious figures on that certificate, which would lead me to suggest that electrician 2 is more likely to be the one to listen to.

 

[Flatowner]

Thank you very much. It is a first floor (so not ground floor) flat in a 3 storey, listed building (very old). There are three other flats and two shops, which form part of the same building. The meters for the flats and shops are under the stairs in the main entrance way, with big red switches as well.

 

[Dartlec]

Out of interest - what sort of boiler is it? An instantaneous electric boiler type? Seems odd to have one on that large a feed - as well as two immersions (Are you on Economy 7?)

The first certificate has a few indicators to me of some 'generated' or 'guesstimated' figures - unless the EICR was a full day and involved removing all lamps, unplugging everything and the wiring is relatively new.

That doesn't mean it wasn't done properly, its impossible to say without seeing it, but there are not many cases with this sort of board where 'replace' is the only suitable option - though it is sometimes worthwhile of course. That's why I'd always recommend going with an electrician who can explain the options and benefits/downsides of each.

If this is privately owned, there is also no requirement on you to actually do anything in response to this report - though possibly reasons to do so for peace of mind, safety of family and perhaps even insurance purposes.

 

[Flatowner]

Thank you, that's really helpful. Yes, it is a Heatrae Sadia Electromax boiler.

 

[Timbo]

I'd be inclined to go with Electrician 2's advice.
Makes more sense.

 

[Grant1987]

I'd be inclined to go with Electrician 2's advice.
Makes more sense.

Yes I would too, however I’m seeing that bedroom sockets on radial 16A I think it was non rcd protected and yes it was installed before 18th edition I’m assuming but was there any mention of that? Pretty high reading of 1.3 ohms I think it was with 4 points. The report looks poor in my opinion just slapped together and readings don’t seem to add up

 

[westward10]

I'd be inclined to go with Electrician 2's advice.
Makes more sense.

Agree rcbos are readily available for that board.

 

[Teddy Lop]

C2 for RCDs for fault protection on tncs?
C2 for RCDs for buried cables? On yer bike!

Yeah go with spark 2 although I'd personally suggest a new consumer unit rather than chucking money on RCBOs for a old unit, especially an MK, but that would be optional...

By hallway is it an escape route? Another prompt to consider a fire-retardant CU, again only recommended though.

 

[pc1966]

Sadly I think the NICEIC guidance was C2 for RCDs, odd as they contribute to BPG#4 which has it down as C3 (except for special areas where C2).

 

[Dartlec]

Sadly I think the NICEIC guidance was C2 for RCDs, odd as they contribute to BPG#4 which has it down as C3 (except for special areas where C2).

Even on the #E5 podcast where they tacked the NAPIT guy about it, his only defence was 'well that's normally a LIM on a periodic anyway' - without giving any good engineering judgement.

Saying that it is always a C2 is in effect saying RCD is required on all domestic properties, since there are very few with any armoured or other suitable cabling - or indeed with the cable >50mm deep.

 

[Soi disant]

Saying that it is always a C2 is in effect saying RCD is required on all domestic properties, since there are very few with any armoured or other suitable cabling - or indeed with the cable >50mm deep.

What does BS 7671:2018 say?

 

[Dartlec]

What does BS 7671:2018 say?

Quite a lot - it's 560 pages...

What it doesn't say in any clear or definitive way is whether existing cabling less than 50mm deep in a wall is a C2 or a C3.

Since it covers requirements for new installatons, almost by definition an install to BS7671:2018 wouldn't have a single code, even a C3 - as that would be a deviation, however small.

 

[Soi disant]

Quite a lot - it's 560 pages...

What it doesn't say in any clear or definitive way is whether existing cabling less than 50mm deep in a wall is a C2 or a C3.

Since it covers requirements for new installatons, almost by definition an install to BS7671:2018 wouldn't have a single code, even a C3 - as that would be a deviation, however small.

None of that is what I meant, really.

Saying that it is always a C2 is in effect saying RCD is required on all domestic properties, since there are very few with any armoured or other suitable cabling - or indeed with the cable >50mm deep.

But an RCD is required on all domestic properties.

One may debate the coding, but not that it is not a contravention or non-conformance.