That report looks like it was written by a worm crawling across the forum
We're getting a few more of 'em.
 
  • Like
Reactions: loz2754
Did anyone else look through the check list? So many errors in there, defects coded that don't appear to be relevant to the installation. Errors all over the place, no mention on the list about all the other C2 and C3 defects found! He has the main switch for the installation as the RCD so I assume the 3 heaters are fed from an off peak supply? Earth electrode ticked as ok but the installation has no earth electrode, but then he's ticked he's tested earth electrode Ra. Not forgetting he's also ticked that he's tested the insulation of non-conducting floors and walls! I really can't imagine the test dude taking floor and wall test plates to a domestic EICR.

C2 code for RCDs provided for fault and fire protection?! C3 for missing alternative supply warning label but page 3 says there is only 1 supply. C3 for missing replacement next inspection recommendation label, surely he should be fitting that?! He has also ticked all of section 4 it's highly likely all of those should be marked N/A, especially as several of those are not permitted in domestic installations. He has also ticked adequacy of reduced low voltage source, not something normally found in the average home! There are also gaps with nothing entered, if these weren't checked for whatever reason, impractical to verify, limited access etc. they should have been marked as not verified. And several others... I like the 9 week retest period, presumably to return to inspect/test the installation properly.

My QS would kick my head in if I turned in a certificate like this.
 
Bit of a problem with the max demand and main fuse....
 
  • Like
Reactions: freddo
It appears your socket circuits are rcd protected and its the heaters that are not...these would be a c3 at the most...c2 for lack of rcd protection would usually stem from sockets that are likely to be used outdoors e.g a ground floor socket. The document itself seems very untidy and almost unreadable, he noted the main fuses as a type 2 1361 fuse with a breaking capacity of 30kA but I believe these are 33kA. He has also noted down limitations on the report for the heater readings but I don't see a related comment within the limitations section at the beginning of the report and he has said that limitations have been agreed with the client...only you know id this is true and agreed...

Overall I'd argue observations don't appear to be correctly coded and it would be wise to get it tested by someone else and the generally poor quality in terms of presentation is not a great sign
 
  • Like
Reactions: freddo and loz2754

Similar threads

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses Heating 2 Go Electrician Workwear Supplier
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

Advert

YOUR Unread Posts

Daily, weekly or monthly email

Thread Information

Title
Absence of RCD - C2 and unsatisfactory EICR
Prefix
N/A
Forum
UK Electrical Forum
Start date
Last reply date
Replies
24

Advert

Thread statistics

Created
sarah_b,
Last reply from
NellyManjaro,
Replies
24
Views
4,508

Advert