EICR code thoughts please?

[craig1000]

Hi all,

Just done a EICR and have found on one of the 3 phase DB's that most of the neutrals and cpcs on one side of the DB are all mixed up and not in correct terminals. To rectify needs a few hours to strip it all back and re terminate due to how messy it has become over the years with add on's etc so I have not done it as part of the reporting process.
I believe this is a code but am a little unsure between C2 or C3.

Thoughts please would be greatly appreciated?

 

[telectrix]

if you were to disconnect the wrong neutral while working in there, you could easily get a belt off it through the load which is still energised deffo a C2 IMO.

 

[MDJ]

A 3 probably, a rough Job, but it would be difficult to code it 2 even though it probably could be a 2, how do you argue this with the customer and look right? have to have a good think over this, a toughy for a 2 IMO.

 

[craig1000]

Yeah i'm tied between the 2 and 3 at the moment. Swinging more to the 2 as well put by telectrix, defo POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS although can see Mikes point about justifying it.
On the basis of the wording of the codes i.e 'C2 potentially dangerous' gona have to go with the C2 I think!? ;-/

 

[telectrix]

i stick with a C2. potential danger.

 

[MDJ]

I expect your right tel with the code 2, just wondering how to convince the customer it is actually dangerous that was my only point.

 

[capitolltd]

A C3 at most. Most competent electricians would check before removing the neutrals. Recommend within your summary, that a suitable label be fitted highlighting the conductors are not suitably arranged.

 

[telectrix]

and if the cables are singles, how in hell can a spark know which is which. if he disses the wrong one, he's got a live cable in his hand and it could potentially cause a danger by suddenly switching off a circuit in use.

 

[craig1000]

I was in doubt but defo a C2 for me now on reflection. The cables in question are singles and as well described by Telectrix it is potentially dangerous, which is the desciption for a C2. A single phase CU on the same job was the same but not so messy and the cables were easily identifiable as T&E so as I tested through the CU it was easy to rectify as part of the process.
If this 3 phase wasn't so messy I would do the same but due to the mess off it there's a few hours works disconnecting, sorting out & reconnecting which is not in my quote for the EICR.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

and if the cables are singles, how in hell can a spark know which is which. if he disses the wrong one, he's got a live cable in his hand and it could potentially cause a danger by suddenly switching off a circuit in use.

Technically he shouldnt be working on a live CU should he?.After all even if neutrals are in correct order it's very hard in a cramped space to be sure you've got the right one. Board should be isolated before disconnecting cables.....code 3 for me.

 

[telectrix]

and what if the board is in use running machines on a production line and you are required only to decommission 1 circuit. you won't be flavour of the month.

 

[sjhall]

C3 ... You should be double checking before working on the circuit ... All in my opinion of course

 

[capitolltd]

How does he tell? Well I'm sure that a single clamp meter would solve that problem. Besides if the op noticed that the arrangement was incorrect, then other competent persons should also.
Just because its singles, would you remove a neutral just because it looked right? Even if it was marked?. No chance

 

[Des 56]

C3 ... You should be double checking before working on the circuit ... All in my opinion of course



That's a fair enough opinion,but

Real world economics will over ride all the safety regs that could be mustered against that procedure

Yes,the board should be isolated,but reality as opposed to text book procedure will ensure that it's a bigger danger than it needs to be

Code it reality or code it text book,mmmm

Code 3

 

[telectrix]

fence sitter. LOL.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

In order to code it has to not comply with 7671.....while no doubt a reg concerning ID of circuit conductors could be found,if a sparks was electrocuted disconnecting an energised conductor in a CU I have absolutely no doubt that an inquest would find him breaking H&S rules by not isolating first

 

[KAS1]

C3 for me it's only potentially dangerous if working on the board live, as it's already been identified by yourself and like someone has said mark up the board for future sparks stating that the "neutrals are not connected correctly, de-energise board before removing cover" Having said that if it was a new job I'd sack the spark for doing a rough job.

 

[tom79bmth]

I agree with kas1 code 3 all day long it not dangerous to general public or people working their only someone working on the electrics and well they should be competent so if they got a belt then they aint competent.

 

[telectrix]

name me 1 spark that has never had a shock of some sort in their working life.

 

[craig1000]

Its a tough one but I'm sticking with Tel, may call me Scam up tomorrow and offer both viewpoints and see what they say!

 

[tom79bmth]

name me 1 spark that has never had a shock of some sort in their working life.

Well probably not many, but that's usually because they haven't followed H&S - safe isolation so who's fault is that !!

 

[capitolltd]

Well the electrical safety council state in their guidance that this departure doesn't even warrant a code, but remember this guide is based on domestic all insulated installations. Now depending on the environment and location and other facts, it might get a C3 at most, as I initially stated.

 

[telectrix]

Well probably not many, but that's usually because they haven't followed H&S - safe isolation so who's fault is that !!

the fault is the real world. can any spark honestly say he's never done a small job on a live installation/DB, swapped out a light switch with the juice on?

 

[Guest55]

wirepuller bang on the money regards h&s.
pulling wrong neutral out is only a prob if you working on energised DB , which you shouldnt be doing in the first place , but.......
we all do it within our own comfort zone and accept that risk , so you cant throw around C2's just because you've goofed up.

missing bonding is only a C2 and that affects all users of a property , whereas mixed up neutrals only sting a spark , who should know better
it a C3 all day long ;-)

 

[tom79bmth]

the fault is the real world. can any spark honestly say he's never done a small job on a live installation/DB, swapped out a light switch with the juice on?

Never lol

 

[telectrix]

liar. LOL.

 

[MDJ]

It is a toughy, I still can't find an argument at all which I could explain to the customer saying it's a C2, I can imagine their reply if I tried to charge them for this, this is a 50/50 and there will be if's and butts all day long over this, however still can't find an argument saying it's a C2 to the customer, so after deep thought and reading this thread 100 times, well a C3 for me I think, or C2 lol, although the Job is very rough to say the least.

 

[tom79bmth]

well only 5 days a week sometimes 6 if i work on Saturday

 

[Guest55]

i think theres many on here who would do well to study more closely the ESC coding guide so as to better gauge defect severity as some of the inspection coding opinions being expressed on recent threads are pure fantasy to be honest.

 

[muzza1]

Another interesting read, ta.

 

[craig1000]

I have gone over the esc guide before posting biff, and wanting to be correct but still unsure after going over the guide a few times posted!
I have said gona go C2 a few posts back, am now swaying back to C3 after further posts from others! ;-/

 

[telectrix]

where the C 2½ when you need it?

 

[MDJ]

i think theres many on here who would do well to study more closely the ESC coding guide so as to better gauge defect severity as some of the inspection coding opinions being expressed on recent threads are pure fantasy to be honest.

you mean like my disgust at showers and fans in bathrooms with no local isolation Biff?

 

[Silly Sausage]

C3 at most, no argument!
Can't fail an installation because of some Neutrals being out of sequence.

 

[telectrix]

seems like i'm out voted. still would not be happy giving the job a satisfactory though.

 

[Guest55]

you mean like my disgust at showers and fans in bathrooms with no local isolation Biff?

i was only pulling your leg in that thread mike ;-)
and my previous comment was aimed at the forum in general.

I have gone over the esc guide before posting biff, and wanting to be correct but still unsure after going over the guide a few times posted!
I have said gona go C2 a few posts back, am now swaying back to C3 after further posts from others! ;-/

not often are periodics black & white but its your inspection , your call

 

[sparkymalarky]

Sorry Telectrix but I give these a C3 all day everyday! I can see both arguments but I C3 it for the same reasons already mentioned! No point in repeating posts again

 

[Deleted member 9648]

wirepuller bang on the money regards h&s.
pulling wrong neutral out is only a prob if you working on energised DB , which you shouldnt be doing in the first place , but.......
we all do it within our own comfort zone and accept that risk , so you cant throw around C2's just because you've goofed up.

missing bonding is only a C2 and that affects all users of a property , whereas mixed up neutrals only sting a spark , who should know better
it a C3 all day long ;-)

Bleedin' eck.....approval from Biff!:happybday:

 

[telectrix]

he must have been on the happy juice tonight.:aureola:

 

[Guest55]

he must have been on the happy juice tonight.:aureola:

i dont booze on a skool nite lol.

 

[D Skelton]

Shouldn't be working live so no danger from removing the wrong neutral. C3

 

[Rampantchilli]

well i had my NICEIC QS assesment last week and this was EXACTLY one of the questions. i started to say C3, but then thought about it, its a no code as there is no immediate danger or potential danger under fault conditions and if working safely the board would be isolated so still no risk, and the EICR is actually for the user not the next electrician to come along, which explains why no ID sleeving on switch wires is also NOT codeable

 

[Deleted member 9648]

well i had my NICEIC QS assesment last week and this was EXACTLY one of the questions. i started to say C3, but then thought about it, its a no code as there is no immediate danger or potential danger under fault conditions and if working safely the board would be isolated so still no risk, and the EICR is actually for the user not the next electrician to come along, which explains why no ID sleeving on switch wires is also NOT codeable

Dont know where your assessor is at TBH.....anything which doesnt comply with 7671 should be coded,and a live conductor not properly identified doesnt comply with 7671 and should be coded.

 

[craig1000]

Cheers for the input Rampantchilli!

On reflection it makes sense, but I would have thought a C3 as for it not complying. BUT thats maybe is just me being ----! Surely no sleeving on switch wires is a code. 'along the lines of 'all conductors correctly identified at their terminations' not the exact wording!

Winds me up how some people fail to just do something which is as easy to do correct as opposed to do wrong or rough as it would appear as it seems it is not wrong to put CPCs/Neutrals in wrong terminals! ;-(

- - - Updated - - -

Dont know where your assessor is at TBH.....anything which doesnt comply with 7671 should be coded,and a live conductor not properly identified doesnt comply with 7671 and should be coded.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ what he says lol^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Englishman]

name me 1 spark that has never had a shock of some sort in their working life.

I would assume that any who regularly work with live equipment often get buzzes.

 

[telectrix]

well i had my NICEIC QS assesment last week and this was EXACTLY one of the questions. i started to say C3, but then thought about it, its a no code as there is no immediate danger or potential danger under fault conditions and if working safely the board would be isolated so still no risk, and the EICR is actually for the user not the next electrician to come along, which explains why no ID sleeving on switch wires is also NOT codeable

bloody niceic. they seem to have a different version of BS7671 to everyone else. they make their own rules and each of them interprets them differently.

 

[Des 56]

bloody niceic. they seem to have a different version of BS7671 to everyone else. they make their own rules and each of them interprets them differently.

They ask of their members that they follow the Niceic rules,but they don't practice the same adhesion when it comes to the IEE rules do they?

It's one barmy organisation and they actually charge for people to be part of that barmy army

 

[D Skelton]

They ask of their members that they follow the Niceic rules,but they don't practice the same adhesion when it comes to the IEE rules do they?

It's one barmy organisation and they actually charge for people to be part of that barmy army

If you wanna be part of the club you gotta follow club rules! That's essentially all it amounts to isn't it.

A phoney club with phoney rules set up to make as much money from their naiive members as possible.

 

[telectrix]

think i'll join the masons next year.

 

[Rampantchilli]

Dont know where your assessor is at TBH.....anything which doesnt comply with 7671 should be coded,and a live conductor not properly identified doesnt comply with 7671 and should be coded.

have you read the guide?
ESC Best Practice Guide No.4 Issue 3

its clearly stated in there.

i dont make the rules, i follow them.