Will this old consumer unit pose any issues with an upcoming EICR?

[Neptune]

I've had invaluable advice from this forum in relation to EICR's and clarifying my understanding that just because the consumer unit is "old", it does not need to be replaced. Since then, I had the EICR carried out at my rental property. This went to plan.

I am now scheduling my next EICR on a separate property and this has an even older Consumer Unit but everything works and seems safe e.g. no cracked fittings or exposed cables from my pre-inspection checks.

My question: will this type of Consumer Unit be okay to produce a satisfactory EICR?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Deleted account]

That's really helpful. If the electrician does not deem this unsatisfactory as part of the EICR then the plug in replacements sound like a god idea. I could have some spares in case there are any issues rather than dicking around with the wires. It's worth stating that in 8 years, these fuses have never needed replacing.

The fuses never needing replacing is immaterial to whether an installation is safe.

our main testing is about ensuring the installation will disconnect in a specific time under fault conditions.

The fact your breakers have never tripped is because a serious fault has not occurred. If a fault does occurs do you have the correct size cable correct size breaker and continuous earth path to create disconnection times possible.

it may be you have the wrone size breaker the wrong size cable and no earths in the proper5y at all. Everything would still functionally work. but in the event of a fault would it disconnect in a time deemed safe.

 

[MJPD29]

Highly unlikely 3036 board would produce satisfactory report with lack of rcd protection. In a rental property you should consider your tenants safety first and foremost and a board change is always a step in the right direction when done properly.

 

[pc1966]

Just for for @Neptune, BS3036 is the standard for rewirable fuses

 

[Neptune]

I definitely have earth wiring on my system as I replaced a damaged socket recently and remember wiring in the earth terminal on the socket.

 

[pc1966]

I definitely have earth wiring on my system as I replaced a damaged socket recently and remember wiring in the earth terminal on the socket.

The concern is more the main earth from the incoming supply, and not just if it is present or not, but if it is adequate for fault-clearing for the highest fuse, etc.

In an EICR the electrician doing it would normally check each circuit to see if the earth loop fault impedance is low enough that any fault will clear in under 0.4s. The maximum impedance depends on the choice of fuse or circuit breaker, there are various tables of Zs value available.

 

[Deleted account]

As in post 14 . See what the EICR brings back. Too much speculation may confuse the issue.

after the day I’ve had ive had enough confusion. ?

 

[radiohead]

Based on the picture I beg to differ on most of the above. There is no cover over the fuses which means live parts are accessible without the use of a tool by simply gripping one of the fuses and tilting it slightly. Without a screwed fuse cover as originally supplied by Wylex these boards present an immediate danger of contact with live parts. If the board does not have a screwed cover it is a code 1 if in an easily accessible position. Code 2 if it is generally out of reach or not easily accessible. Some of these boards have a cover with a knurled nut removable by hand, so if the cover is fitted there is no access to live parts , but nevertheless live parts can be accessed without the use of a tool so a code 2 is appropriate. Later boards had the screwed cover requiring a tool, but it MUST be in place.

 

[Rockingit]

Based on the picture I beg to differ on most of the above. There is no cover over the fuses which means live parts are accessible without the use of a tool by simply gripping one of the fuses and tilting it slightly. Without a screwed fuse cover as originally supplied by Wylex these boards present an immediate danger of contact with live parts. If the board does not have a screwed cover it is a code 1 if in an easily accessible position. Code 2 if it is generally out of reach or not easily accessible. Some of these boards have a cover with a knurled nut removable by hand, so if the cover is fitted there is no access to live parts , but nevertheless live parts can be accessed without the use of a tool so a code 2 is appropriate. Later boards had the screwed cover requiring a tool, but it MUST be in place.

I'm not, necessarily, disagreeing with you, but I am caused to wonder at how we've never heard of the hundreds of thousands who must have died back in the 70's and 80's changing fuses.

 

[radiohead]

Things were different back then but I'll wager there were many householders who got a handful from these boards messing around with the fuses. In fact there was a case in the last few years which was reported by the NICEIC where an elderly man received a severe shock from a metal coat hanger which came into contact with a wylex fuse carrier in one of these boards without the cover fitted. I suspect you would not question any code 1 for accessible exposed live parts in a different situation, yet it always amazes me that inspectors consistently ignore exposed live parts in these boards.

 

[Dave OCD]

The other frightening thing is when someone rewires the fuse badly and you get a tiny bit of excess live wire poking out, hard to see but you'd soon know about it.

 

[pc1966]

It might be that folk do more dumb stuff these days.

When new the boards had a cover you had to removed before you could access the fuse carriers. True you did not need a tool, but enough to stop the casual idiot. But with time and laziness the covers get lost, and folk store crap alongside the boards, and that sort of thing happens

In years gone by when I replaced the fuses with plug-in MCBs sometimes I would cut out the cover so the MCBs poke through but stayed in place, etc, but if the board was out of reach or cover gone then sometimes it would just be left like that.

If it was mine then I would put in a RCBO board, only a few circuits so cost versus RCD board negligable and far less risk/trouble longer term.

 

[timhoward]

Without a screwed fuse cover as originally supplied by Wylex these boards present an immediate danger of contact with live parts.

Of course, it (hopefully) goes without saying that a board change is the best course of action, for many good reasons, not least including the fact that tenants with a pulse tend to pay rent more quickly.

pc1966 beat me to it, but I was going to comment that if any Wylex without an outer cover within reach is an automatic C1 then presumably any with plug in MCBs designed to upgrade these boards are also automatically a C1, as the manufacturer can't have intended us to start hacking up the cover?

 

[radiohead]

Of course, it (hopefully) goes without saying that a board change is the best course of action, for many good reasons, not least including the fact that tenants with a pulse tend to pay rent more quickly.

pc1966 beat me to it, but I was going to comment that if any Wylex without an outer cover within reach is an automatic C1 then presumably any with plug in MCBs designed to upgrade these boards are also automatically a C1, as the manufacturer can't have intended us to start hacking up the cover?

Not necessarily. When Wylex introduced the plug in MCB's the board covers incorporated a 'knock out' to enable the cover to be fitted with the mcb's sitting proud of the cover. This is fine as the cover still prevents finger access to the live prongs on the mcb's.
It should also be pointed out that without the cover in place where fuses are fitted there is a risk of molten copper being ejected from the carrier when a fuse blows, particularly with larger fuse elements like 30a. I have never heard of this causing a fire or injury but it was a secondary intended function of the fuse cover.

 

[westward10]

The original intention of the shield was to prevent arc spatter coming out and setting fire to your Axminster. The originals had a thumb turn fixing which did not require a tool. It was not to prevent access to live parts although some may see this as it's intention now.

 

[Dave OCD]

Not necessarily. When Wylex introduced the plug in MCB's the board covers incorporated a 'knock out' to enable the cover to be fitted with the mcb's sitting proud of the cover. This is fine as the cover still prevents finger access to the live prongs on the mcb's.
It should also be pointed out that without the cover in place where fuses are fitted there is a risk of molten copper being ejected from the carrier when a fuse blows, particularly with larger fuse elements like 30a. I have never heard of this causing a fire or injury but it was a secondary intended function of the fuse cover.

Many a time I've carefully tapped out that thinned out section with an old screwdriver and hammer, then filed the edges nicely ready to fit over the new plug-in MCBs . Those along with an upfront RCD were the big safety upgrade at one time. ?