Could This Be A Fused Neutral?

[SparkyMcsparkface]

Hi, came across this today, double width cutout, never seen it before. Not sure if it could be fused on the neutral or whether I am worrying with no need. Any advice appreciated. (Haven't pulled the cutout obviously, even though it isn't sealed - I have a feeling it might be too stiff to pull out anyway, maybe....)

 

[davesparks]

What colour.

Black and blue

 

[westward10]

Painful then was it.

 

[davesparks]

Painful then was it.

It was terribly painful having two ladies giving me their undivided attention and all the tea I could drink

 

[davesparks]

And this was the result

 

[NDG Elecs]

Agreed that it falls outside the fixed wiring installation that I am testing, but the Schedule Of Inspections requires me to record an outcome of inspection on the condition of the service head.

I have argued about this before on this forum. I usually put N/V for those items. Out of my jurisdiction and not my responsibility to record in my view. I will contact DNO if any issues found no problem. Some of the other posts on this thread make interesting points I think.

Edit: not your typical blue rinse then Dave!

 

[Jamchiv01]

If we find an issue with the Service head or meter, we give it the correct Outcome C1/2/3 depending on severity.

Before we fully issue the report we alert the customer and tell them we can either submit the report with the c1/2/3 on it or you can contact the DNO, have them rectify the issue and call us back to verify it's been rectified and we will issue the report with it as a tick.

 

[davesparks]

If we find an issue with the Service head or meter, we give it the correct Outcome C1/2/3 depending on severity.

Before we fully issue the certificate we alert the customer and tell them we can either submit the cert with the c1/2/3 on it or you can contact the DNO, have them rectify the issue and call us back to verify it's been rectified and we will issue the cert with it as a tick.

its a report, not a certificate. Although it sounds like a petty thing it makes a huge difference

 

[Jamchiv01]

its a report, not a certificate. Although it sounds like a petty thing it makes a huge difference

That's what I meant sorry, I edited the post

 

[westward10]

I have argued about this before on this forum. I usually put N/V for those items. Out of my jurisdiction and not my responsibility to record in my view. I will contact DNO if any issues found no problem. Some of the other posts on this thread make interesting points I think.

Edit: not your typical blue rinse then Dave!

It is a requirement of an EICR to comment on it, if you feel it is outside the remit, which it is not then you should discuss it with the client that you will record it as a Limitation although why you would do this is not clear.

 

[NDG Elecs]

It is a requirement of an EICR to comment on it, if you feel it is outside the remit, which it is not then you should discuss it with the client that you will record it as a Limitation although why you would do this is not clear.

My view is that the bods at the IET have spoke with various DNO reps and have subsequently passed these inspection items on to the humble spark. If I am not deemed competent to pull a main fuse how am I competent to comment accurately on the DNOs equipment. If there is an issue I will always contact the DNO without a problem. But the installation I inspect and record details about starts at the outgoing tails of the meter.

 

[westward10]

It is asking you to view on its condition not to pull any fuse carrier.

 

[NDG Elecs]

You are missing my point Westward. DNOs equipment is outside of the remit of 7671. As I see it the DNOs are trying to basically come to a point in time when every one has smart meters and home visits are no longer necessary whereby defects may have been picked up on previously. Hence the inclusion of these items in the schedule. I will 'lim' it in future just for you! After lengthy discussions with the client....... obviously....

 

[westward10]

Don't know what the issue is I really don't .

 

[davesparks]

You are missing my point Westward. DNOs equipment is outside of the remit of 7671. As I see it the DNOs are trying to basically come to a point in time when every one has smart meters and home visits are no longer necessary whereby defects may have been picked up on previously. Hence the inclusion of these items in the schedule. I will 'lim' it in future just for you! After lengthy discussions with the client....... obviously....

Interestingly the DNO's equipment installed within a customers proerty is not entirely outside the remit of 7671, however it is something that we e are not allowed to interfere with.
However we can look at it, and that is all that is required to inspect it.

 

[NDG Elecs]

Don't know what the issue is I really don't .

Haha! Last time I had this debate on here I got exactly the same response from some others.
As I say I will be the first to ring the DNO if any problems are found. However, I am not putting my name and signature to a document that includes things which I am not deemed to be competent to assess. That's my take on it..!

 

[NDG Elecs]

Interestingly the DNO's equipment installed within a customers proerty is not entirely outside the remit of 7671, however it is something that we e are not allowed to interfere with.
However we can look at it, and that is all that is required to inspect it.

Not according to the EICR schedules no!!
Seriously though, in what respects are DNO equipment within 7671 DS? I am not the most avid reader of the yellow book TBH! I tend to know what I need to know for the work I carry out.

 

[davesparks]

Not according to the EICR schedules no!!
Seriously though, in what respects are DNO equipment within 7671 DS? I am not the most avid reader of the yellow book TBH! I tend to know what I need to know for the work I carry out.

I can't really comment on the actual regs too much until I can bothered to get my copy out of the van.

In the respect that the ukpn network design guide states that any equipment installed on a consumer's premises needs to comply with 7671. It goes on to specify that the size of the supply cable and the earth fault loop impedance need to be such that the fuse in the cutout will disconnect within 5 seconds. Outside of the consumer's premises the disconnection time is a lot longer.
This is one of the reasons they don't like installing anything within the consumer's premises these days.
If I can dig out the relevant document from my steam-powered junk heap of a computer then I'll post it up, but don't hold your breath for that.

 

[NDG Elecs]

I will look into that. My thinking at present is that that is possibly their (ukpn) take on it. I have my brown, red and green copies upstairs but missus is asleep and not likely to take kindly to me waking her up looking up regs! Yellow copy in van also, and it's cold and rainy so not getting that tonight!

 

[7029 dave]

You are missing my point Westward. DNOs equipment is outside of the remit of 7671. As I see it the DNOs are trying to basically come to a point in time when every one has smart meters and home visits are no longer necessary whereby defects may have been picked up on previously. Hence the inclusion of these items in the schedule. I will 'lim' it in future just for you! After lengthy discussions with the client....... obviously....

When smart meters are fully installed, they will still have a safety inspection every 2 years just like any other meter, DNO equipment gets inspected too.

 

[NDG Elecs]

When smart meters are fully installed, they will still have a safety inspection every 2 years just like any other meter, DNO equipment gets inspected too.

That's interesting to know Dave. Is that an across the UK thing or just SSE? Also are meters currently meant to be checked every two years? The reason I ask the last bit is I see a lot of meters with poorly installed tails with exposed inner insulation and sometimes slightly exposed conductors at the terminals. I know the logistics of planning to update where necessary must be a nightmare at times, and cannot see how each and every install would actually be checked every two years. Is it not also dependant on whether the meter reader is diligent enough to report all they see that should be updated? I suspect many can't be bothered too!

Edit: I just noticed that you used the word "still" above.

 

[Risteard]

I wish to state that I agree with the use of the FI (Further Investigation required) code for apparent deficiencies with the DNO's equipment. In principle if fused neutrals were suspected (without getting in to whether this was a reasonable belief or otherwise) then the DNO are needed to verify this, and so further investigation without delay is required. It is also clear that this must result in an Unsatisfactory report.

 

[7029 dave]

That's interesting to know Dave. Is that an across the UK thing or just SSE? Also are meters currently meant to be checked every two years? The reason I ask the last bit is I see a lot of meters with poorly installed tails with exposed inner insulation and sometimes slightly exposed conductors at the terminals. I know the logistics of planning to update where necessary must be a nightmare at times, and cannot see how each and every install would actually be checked every two years. Is it not also dependant on whether the meter reader is diligent enough to report all they see that should be updated? I suspect many can't be bothered too!

Edit: I just noticed that you used the word "still" above.

Yes that is across all suppliers, and yes an answer to your question we do rely on DR's to pick this up if they can be bothered.

 

[7029 dave]

Just to add recertification, of any meter is an ongoing process been going for donks, it is a requirement by law.

 

[The Ghost]

Under ESQCR all neutral fuses were to be replaced with a solid link by 2013. I would think its highly unlikely there is a neutral fuse in there.

 

[7029 dave]

I wish to state that I agree with the use of the FI (Further Investigation required) code for apparent deficiencies with the DNO's equipment. In principle if fused neutrals were suspected (without getting in to whether this was a reasonable belief or otherwise) then the DNO are needed to verify this, and so further investigation without delay is required. It is also clear that this must result in an Unsatisfactory report.

Fused neutrals are being replaced by the DNO, but they are Cat B, when identified.

 

[westward10]

Fused neutrals are being replaced by the DNO, but they are Cat B, when identified.

As a matter of interest what is Cat B defined as.

 

[7029 dave]

As a matter of interest what is Cat B defined as.

Westie in other words it is not classed as CAT A, exposed live parts, where they have to respond within 3hrs, I think the lead time for CATB is 2 weeks, CAT C , is when they can get there, eg broken tag on the cut out or fuse carrier.

 

[Risteard]

Fused neutrals are being replaced by the DNO, but they are Cat B, when identified.

That may be, but the Electrician (in my view) was absolutely right to state that Further Investigation was required (in this case by the DNO). It is also clear that we then have no option but to assess the overall condition of the electrical installation as "Unsatisfactory". As such I feel that the criticism of the Electrician in this instance is grossly unfair as he acted appropriately.

 

[snowhead]

As a matter of interest what is Cat B defined as.

Page 15, 16
https://www.mocopa.org.uk/images/do...idance_for_Service_Termination_Issues_3.3.pdf

 

[The Ghost]

Page 15, 16

Mhmm thats a good resource, thanks.