Taking action against a cowboy install...

[DNS1]

A couple of months ago my parents had a new kitchen installed. Part of the install involved a new induction hob which meant a new circuit to be added to the board.

Now unfortunately they didn't tell me about anything that was going on, and ended up being talked into having their perfectly good 16th edition board replaced, instead of just sourcing an appropriate MCB or RCBO and connecting the hob circuit to the spare way.

I popped round today and whilst there I thought I'd fix a lightswitch that had been wired backwards for years. Simple enough job (despite half the screws being missing and a couple of wires simply resting against the terminals)

Few things I noticed about their new DB that cause me concern so I'd like another opinion:

- Notices missing from board (no sticker about the non-standard colours, no inspection due sticker, no sticker about testing RCD)
- MCBs labelled incorrectly (house is a little odd in that the 2 RFCs cover each side of the house, rather than upstairs and down, but not labelled as such)
- Both lighting circuits on same RCD
- Hob wired in buried T+E but not protected by RCD at all

Correct me if I'm wrong but none of the above are acceptable for a newly installed board are they? It all got me thinking about the whole installation and I'm now a little suspicious about how the initial testing could have been passed, given the fact that at least one lighting circuit clearly had poor connections in a switch.

Unfortunately I've not yet seen the certificates for any of the above work.

What does everyone think about the above? Should I be looking at take some action against this installer?

 

[DNS1]

Not all domestic installers are as silly as this one but if everyone was made to do the full 4 years there would be far less silly things like this happening.

I disagree I'm afraid mate.

I'm not an apprenticeship sparks, but I can safely say that no work I do will EVER be as bad as this guys...

He could of course say that I'd tampered with the circuit and disconnected the RCD for the hob etc, but his own certificates back me up!

Add to that the fact that he's quoted a 5 second disconnection time for a lighting circuit, said that the outbuilding distribution is a final, and not done any of the IR tests (got a witness to say that he didn't disconnect any loads during his visit), I think the NIC would be on pretty dodgy ground to side with him! If they do, then it's time to talk to BBC Rogue Traders... (about NIC, not just the installer!)

 

[onfire25]

Might of just tested at 250V dc between p-cpc, n-cpc, p/n-cpc to save hassle of disconnecting lamps etc.....as long as still above 1Mohm is still a pass

 

[Skyba]

I disagree I'm afraid mate.

I'm not an apprenticeship sparks, but I can safely say that no work I do will EVER be as bad as this guys...

He could of course say that I'd tampered with the circuit and disconnected the RCD for the hob etc, but his own certificates back me up!

Add to that the fact that he's quoted a 5 second disconnection time for a lighting circuit, said that the outbuilding distribution is a final, and not done any of the IR tests (got a witness to say that he didn't disconnect any loads during his visit), I think the NIC would be on pretty dodgy ground to side with him! If they do, then it's time to talk to BBC Rogue Traders... (about NIC, not just the installer!)

Like I said not ALL domestic installers are bad but If everyone was made to do it the long way there would be far less people out there doing work like this.

I'm not an apprentice spark but I've still done it the long way, I worked at college alongside the apprentices and found work for myself when I could and have worked as a mate and an improver to gain the experience.

I agree that the bloke is looking pretty poor but it's getting someone to listen that's hard.

I bought a car from Evans halshaw which I later discovered they'd done a massive cover up job and sold me a dangerous car had plenty of evidence including recorded phone calls with them and the guy they bought the car from talking about the damage, due to a loop hole they couldn't be used in court and I was left high and dry and they still had my money.

 

[DNS1]

Might of just tested at 250V dc between p-cpc, n-cpc, p/n-cpc to save hassle of disconnecting lamps etc

Yeah, I wondered that, but he's not mentioned it on the form. Thought it was mandatory if not doing the full 500V test. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[DNS1]

I agree that the bloke is looking pretty poor but it's getting someone to listen that's hard.

Yeah, agree there.

At least in this case the guy was sub-contracted, so we can complain to Wickes as well as the NICEIC.

 

[onfire25]

Yeah, I wondered that, but he's not mentioned it on the form. Thought it was mandatory if not doing the full 500V test. Correct me if I'm wrong.

i personally would of made a note on the cert but hey......just look at the quality of the cert already......would you really expect anything more?!

 

[SYKRAPS]

Went over to my parents place today to do the minor work I mentioned in another thread (fusing and extending a spur to fit a light)

I disconnected the downstairs RFC, connected up the new light and then went to do the initial testing for the circuit.

Bearing in mind that the CU was new a few months ago... I did NOT expect to find no continuity between ends of the ring! I certainly did not expect to find that the installer, in addition to the other issues, has FABRICATED his continuity figures on the certificate!

Also found various other mistakes, would love to see how many you lot find...

View attachment 15542
View attachment 15543

My assessor would pull this test cert to pieces

 

[Amp David]

You've forgot to post a picture of page 1 of his cert,

 

[Phil]

if you upload the cert can you make sure the clients personal details along with the contractors personal information is completely removed please

 

[DNS1]

if you upload the cert can you make sure the clients personal details along with the contractors personal information is completely removed please

Yeah, deliberately didn't upload page 1 for this reason... I'd have liked to name and shame, but thought better of it!

 

[ackbarthestar]

Few things I noticed about their new DB that cause me concern so I'd like another opinion:

- Notices missing from board (no sticker about the non-standard colours, no inspection due sticker, no sticker about testing RCD)
- MCBs labelled incorrectly (house is a little odd in that the 2 RFCs cover each side of the house, rather than upstairs and down, but not labelled as such)
- Both lighting circuits on same RCD
- Hob wired in buried T+E but not protected by RCD at all

No mention of the borrowed neutral between the upstairs and downstairs lighting then ?
Not sure why there is the lack of RCD protection for the hob? must have been in a rush to finish
2 spare ways available so they should have been filled.

Just thought I'd throw in my pennyworth

 

[DNS1]

Just spent a while looking at the numbers on that certificate and I'm getting more and more suspicious of this guys competence...

Pretty much identical R1+R2 values for both lighting circuits, despite one being much longer than the others (3 level house, all upstairs lights on the same "upstairs" mcb, so I'd estimate the circuit is twice as long.

The same can be said for the R1+R2 of the socket circuits (although as I've said, there's no continuity anyway due to a break somewhere, so he has to have fabricated those results)

 

[not clever]

Zs 32.2 ohms for garage submain?

 

[SYKRAPS]

Zs 32.2 ohms for garage submain?

Lol it must be on a spike that is not recorded, protected by an RCD that is not recorded or supplying a submain thats not recorded

 

[DNS1]

Zs 32.2 ohms for garage submain?

Dear oh dear... I didn't notice that one... He's correctly quoted the maximum though!

 

[Spazz]

Just been looking at results:

Shed - how can you have a R1+R2 of that low and a Zs that high?? Hes misplaced the . I think! - He also states a 30mA RCD is installed on the shed - when clearly its not!
Hob - That must be one short run - less than a meter with 0.02ohms for R1+R2
Lights - as said above clearly C6 is longer with more points so how can it be the same value as downstairs??
Cooker - Same situation as hob - very short!

Also Zs and Ze they dont match up - considering Ze is 0.27 how can you have 2 circuits at 0.24 showing a Ze of 0.22 (though calculation) and some over circuits showing a Ze of 0.28 - I know bonding can bring it down and up but not by this amount.

I am wondering has he cooked the results??

Also all IRs - am I not right in saying that a reading of >200 Mohms is normally received from someone testing at 250v DC and not 500v DC??

 

[not clever]

There are so many mistakes.

1. Nature of supply parameters Ze 0.27 ohms................. it's not a measurement required it is what the DNO say or the books figure for the supply type 0.35ohms
2. Primary ocpd 130Ka for a 1361 type 2............... I thought it was 33Ka
3. Installation at origin EEBADS.......................(I would have to ask when this cert was done) should be ADS
4. Garage supply down as a final circuit ..............................surely a distribution circuit(unless it is only supplying one socket)
5. Garage circuit cpc via sheath.....................should be Armour.
6. All circuit disconnection times are wrong apart from the 2x socket circuits.

At this point I gave up.................
As for you lack of ring continuity, did you test at the point where you added your spur & did you test before adding your spur?............might have already been a spur off a spur

EEBADS as you don't know stands for Earthed Equipotential Bonding and Automatic Disconnection of Supply

 

[DNS1]

I was unsure about the Ze... I thought you could use either the DNO value OR you could measure and use that. However, giving it some thought, the measured 0.27ohms actually sounds pretty high considering the DNO substation is less than 20 yards away in this case.

I tested for continuity at the board when I disconnected the ring prior to adding the new spur.

I'm pretty sure I've worked out where the break in the circuit is, I think it's due to some work my dad did years ago (moved socket in a bedroom). Just a DIY job, he's not a sparks. There's no way on earth that continuity was present when the board was installed!

The garage supply is a distribution circuit supplying a 15th edition board. I know it's a dodgy install (connection to the SWA from the house is via a taped up joint, I can only assume it was a bodge from the builders or previous owner! It's on the "to-do" list!) The fact that the guy reconnected it with a 32 ohm Zs and a taped up joint (right behind the CU) is further evidence of his incompetence...

Cheers for the explanation of EEBADS. I'm assuming it's a pre-17th edition term

 

[spark 68]

eebads = 16th ed and possibly prior, I only go back as far as 16th ed

 

[DNS1]

Thanks spark!

I really think there needs to be a course for people doing the 17th which teaches the out-dated terms and regs!

 

[1shortcircuit]

eebads was briefly covered in my 17th edition 5mw course lol

:thumbsup

 

[1shortcircuit]

Thanks spark!

I really think there needs to be a course for people doing the 17th which teaches the out-dated terms and regs!

I think you'll find there is, it's called experience lol

My route in means that my knowledge of previous editions is very limited which is why I do not yet do EICR's. Maybe when a few more additions have been and gone I will?

:thumbsup

 

[spark 68]

I keep the 16th ed amd1 and amd2 books, and the 16th ed OSG, as well as the 17th red book in addition to the current one to aid EICR's, I could really do with a 15th ed book too.

And a couple of the older GN's OSG's

 

[GLENNSPARK]

I'd be asking firstly for details of their CPS provider to check on whether they're registered. Then I'd be asking about why they felt the need to replace a 16th CU that could quite easily (I assume) had an RCBO fitted, then the stickers, then the testing etc etc. I'd then invite them to come back and test properly and certify and if they don't it's over to Dom Littlewood with them.

well as much as i dont like this kind of goin on.....
Dominic Littlewood Trev?
last thing we need is that little goblin`s fires stoking...

 

[Elmer BeFuddled]

If no ones hurt or dead your complaint will likely fall on deaf ears
take up your questions and concerns with the installer first and see what he has to say for himself

Sounds like just another case of an inexperienced sparky thinking hes doing the right thing with a little bit of knowledge

Probably not intentionally trying to rip you off but he's only seen a 17th edition board in the wooden bay at the college he was working in the week before he was doing your kitchen! Lol

I find that quite offensive matey. Not all of us Electrical Trainee as you like to call us (although I'm a 6 month wonder) are as thick as we are made out to be!!! At least we work to the latest regs.
(As Thom Dolby sang "At the tender age of 3 I was hooked to a machine just to keep my mouth from spouting junk.") Well, At my tender age of 4 I was soldering copper pipes together.

 

[DNS1]

I think you'll find there is, it's called experience lol

Very true mate.

Guess we're all going to come across stuff we've not seen before at some point, that's where this awesome forum comes in! I've probably learnt chatting on here over the past year than I would ever have learnt at college!

 

[spark 68]

Elmer don't take it to heart mate, there are good and bad in all walks of life, there are good and bad 'short course trained' people, just as there are good and bad T/S people.

 

[Elmer BeFuddled]

I may have spoke out of turn. This usually happens when I go on the Morgans spiced rum!!

Moral: Stay off the Morgans!

 

[Skyba]

Thanks spark!

I really think there needs to be a course for people doing the 17th which teaches the out-dated terms and regs!

There is, it used to be called 2330 lvl 2&3 alongside working with experienced sparks who you can ask questions lol.

 

[GLENNSPARK]

Is THAT what it says?! I couldn't read the writing at all? Excuse me for being naive, but what does it mean?!

As I understand from a quick google search, it's a pre-17th edition term. Is reference method "3" a pre-17th edition thing as well?! 5 second disconnection for 6A finals?

NO ITS NOT `PRE 17TH EDITION`..!!!
eebads still exists 411.1