Do socket outlets in a Pub need to be RCD/RCBO protected!

[MerlinGremlin]

What are peoples thoughts on this, should socket outlets in the general public areas be RCD/RCBO protected? I believe they do and have put them down as a C2 on a recent EICR but recently got a phone call to say it's a C3!

 

[Deleted member 93172]

I was once a QS on a contracting company, I was told that you can't change the certificates unless you get the testing engineer to explain his findings, or he should go to site and checkout the defects of the results with the testing guy.

 

[davesparks]

Yes they should now be provided with RCD protection.
As for determining a code, that depends on when they were installed and their intended use.

The code doesn't change based on when they were installed, the EICR and the codes applied are based solely on the current edition of bs7671

 

[buzzlightyear]

I was once a QS on a contracting company, I was told that you can't change the certificates unless you get the testing engineer to explain his findings, or he should go to site and checkout the defects of the results with the testing guy.

what you see is what you find.

 

[Toneyz]

If an installation has been installed to a previous addition of BS7671 eg 15th/16th and still complies with that edition should not make the installation warrant a C1 (danger present .risk of injury immediate action required ) or C2 (potentially dangerous) the standard of additional safety of which electrical installations are installed to has changed/improved .Other regulations eg H & S acts may come into play and require RCD protection. I can't see what Part P has to do with a EICR however if I am correct it comes into play if certain work is undertaken when the domestic and business premises share the same meter.

 

[buzzlightyear]

the Q/S should be their with the persons who is testing it .and over seeing the testing

 

[Deleted member 26818]

The code doesn't change based on when they were installed, the EICR and the codes applied are based solely on the current edition of bs7671

Yes and the current edition/amendment just like all the other editions/amendments, states installations constructed to earlier editions may not necessarily be unsafe.
Failure to take on board this fact, is failure to conduct the inspection in accordance with the current edition/amendment of BS7671.

 

[The Ghost]

When all is said and done considering it is a pub and people are drinking and have access to sockets, well I am sure I do not have to underline the greater risk in that situation. Some pubs are crazy later at night. If I was the Landlord I would want to know how safe it was or was not. I would go with C2. I was asked to install a USB socket in a commercial catering and did so very reluctantly as I just do not trust the general public. Lets face it the classification of operatives (BA1 etc.) places ordinary people below children and handicapped! Which I find quite amusing.
P.S. It was on an RCBO!

 

[buzzlightyear]

Yes and the current edition/amendment just like all the other editions/amendments, states installations constructed to earlier editions may not necessarily be unsafe.
Failure to take on board this fact, is failure to conduct the inspection in accordance with the current edition/amendment of BS7671

weather it is 15th 16th and now 17th some body get hurt the h/s will be on some bodys back .

 

[westward10]

Think we may get some thunder this evening.

 

[MerlinGremlin]

That makes no sense at all, of course you've been knocked back.
An RCD does not provide any sort of mechanical protection, if mechanical protection is required then you need to install mechanical protection to rectify it.

We do put down for mechanical protection also along with rcd/RCBO protection. Sorry I didn't explain fully, I should of put it.

 

[buzzlightyear]

We do put down for mechanical protection also along with rcd/RCBO protection. Sorry I didn't explain fully, I should of put it.

to late now the horse has bolted .

 

[westward10]

Is this pub a one off or are your company involved with chain because your QS maybe maintaining continuity through the Reporting system.

 

[davesparks]

Yes and the current edition/amendment just like all the other editions/amendments, states installations constructed to earlier editions may not necessarily be unsafe.
Failure to take on board this fact, is failure to conduct the inspection in accordance with the current edition/amendment of BS7671.

It states that compliance with a previous version does not necessarily mean it is unsafe, it does not say that compliance with a previous version excuses non-compliance with the current version.

It means that you cannot code something purely and solely for the fact it complies with a previous version. if there is danger, potential danger or an improvement can be recommended for safety then it should be coded accordingly regardless of the previous editions. Otherwise no progress will ever be made.
A good example is that the old wiring colours comply with a previous version but do not comply with the current version, there is no danger, potential danger or improvement associated with it so it gets no code.
On the other hand an enclosure where live terminals can be accessed without the use of a key or tool complied with a previous version but do not comply now and would likely receive a C2
Thee are many more simple examples like this.

 

[davesparks]

We do put down for mechanical protection also along with rcd/RCBO protection. Sorry I didn't explain fully, I should of put it.

I still don't understand, if the only observation is a lack of mechanical protection then what is the point of recommending fitting an RCD?

 

[westward10]

I don't see this as a grey area at all. I do not concern myself with what ifs and maybes and scenarios you cannot predict or foresee, make a statement of fact that socket outlets do not have additional rcd protection, sensibly Code it, move on.

 

[buzzlightyear]

merlin Gering ,next time you do EICR take some picture and show your Q/S.
him your findings.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

It doesn't matter whether it excuses compliance with current Regulations.
The fact remains that the IET are never going to say that a situation which was deemed safe in previous editions is now unsafe. (The legal ramifications would be enormous.)

BS7671 requires us to make observation on non-compliances which may give rise to danger.
If the Regs. do not consider a non-compliance which complied at the time of construction to be unsafe, how can you then state the situation is potentially dangerous?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Looks like the thunder has arrived.
At least here it has.

 

[buzzlightyear]

Looks like the thunder has arrived.
At least here it has.

not here!

 

[Ian1981]

the Q/S should be their with the persons who is testing it .and over seeing the testing

Not very practical the inspector should be able to carry out this kind of work unsupervised or shouldn't be doing it

 

[davesparks]

It doesn't matter whether it excuses compliance with current Regulations.
The fact remains that the IET are never going to say that a situation which was deemed safe in previous editions is now unsafe. (The legal ramifications would be enormous.)

BS7671 requires us to make observation on non-compliances which may give rise to danger.
If the Regs. do not consider a non-compliance which complied at the time of construction to be unsafe, how can you then state the situation is potentially dangerous?

Well they have, there are many things which were once required by the regulations which are no longer compliant, fused neutrals being one example.

If the regs do not now consider an item which complied at the time to be unsafe now then it is not unsafe, however if the regulations do now consider it to be unsafe then it should be coded.

Fused neutrals complied with a previous edition.
Unfused supplies complied with a previous edition.
Bare conductors on cleats complied with a previous edition.
Green being used for L3 complied with a previous edition.
Open fronted switchgear complied with a previous edition.
Bare conductors encased in a wooden moulding complied with a previous edition.

The point is that if an item does not comply with current regulations and it is immediately dangerous then it is a C1
If an item does not comply with current regulations and is potentially dangerous it is a C2
If an item does not comply with current regulations and an improvement can be recommended for safety based on current regulations then it is a C3

 

[Risteard]

As for determining a code, that depends on when they were installed

No it doesn't. That would be ridiculous. When they were installed does not materially alter their safety now.

 

[freddo]

Bare conductors on cleats complied with a previous edition...
Bare conductors encased in a wooden moulding complied with a previous edition.

What editions permitted bare conductors on cleats and in wooden containment? Single insulated conductors yes, but bare conductors?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

What editions permitted bare conductors on cleats and in wooden containment? Single insulated conductors yes, but bare conductors?

Bare conductors are allowed now, as is wooden containment.
Whether there is a prohibition against using both at the same time, I don't know?

 

[davesparks]

What editions permitted bare conductors on cleats and in wooden containment? Single insulated conductors yes, but bare conductors?

Off the top of my head I think it's in the 9th edition that I've seen it.
Just to clarify I'm talking about bare conductors on cleats which are not placed out of reach or behind barriers etc as is now required.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Hmmm.
Says bare conductors on cleats which is still allowed.
Then says bare conductors encased in wooden mouldings.
As far as I am aware, wooden backed accessories and wooden containment are still allowed.
Not sure about the bare conductors encased in wooden mouldings?

 

[freddo]

Cool! Modern wiring is so boring.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Lol, you can purchase modern day wooden fronted accessories:
Classic 2 Gang 13Amp Switched Socket in Solid Oak [CXC06-2-OBK] - £15.99 - http://www.switchtowood.co.uk/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=93&cPath=4&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI4bTFoMKV1QIVpL_tCh1mmgDJEAQYASABEgKdyfD_BwE#googlebase

 

[Toneyz]

If an installation has been installed to a previous addition of BS7671 eg 15th/16th and still complies with that edition should not make the installation warrant a C1 (danger present .risk of injury immediate action required ) or C2 (potentially dangerous) the standard of additional safety of which electrical installations are installed to has changed/improved .Other regulations eg H & S acts may come into play and require RCD protection. I can't see what Part P has to do with a EICR however if I am correct it comes into play if certain work is undertaken when the domestic and business premises share the same meter.

for what reason

 

[davesparks]

Lol, you can purchase modern day wooden fronted accessories:
Classic 2 Gang 13Amp Switched Socket in Solid Oak [CXC06-2-OBK] - £15.99 - http://www.switchtowood.co.uk/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=93&cPath=4&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI4bTFoMKV1QIVpL_tCh1mmgDJEAQYASABEgKdyfD_BwE#googlebase

Great, but I don't quite see how that relates to the current topic?