Doubtful EICR

[Andy78]

I was given a couple of EICRs by a colleague today to peruse. They both pertain to rented properties and both have similar recommendations. Both supplies are TNC-S, both 16mm supply conductors, both 10mm main earth and 6mm main bonding. They have issued C2 for all of the following issues

• Use of 3036 board - requires upgrading
• main earth conductor too small
• main bonding conductor too small

I am am maintaining that all of these should be given no code at all, and the "specialist testing company" is trying it on to gain a bit of work. I am in the middle of helping my colleague construct a letter that questions the findings of these EICRs to the benefit of the client who is currently considering taking this company on for the remedial work and two further EICRs.

I have referenced the regs which state that previous installations require no upgrading unless unsafe, and the ESC EICR guide which state that use of 3036 boards and minimum 6mm main bonds should not attract any code.

Can anyone help back me up my viewpoint with anything I may have missed, or indeed does anyone disagree with my stance ?

 

[trev]

Are these the only items you disagree with or are there more?

 

[Silly Sausage]

Get them to prove their case, with reference to relevant regs. etc.
Opinions are worthless.

 

[rattlehead85]

Well there is nothing at all wrong with 16mm tails if the incoming fuse is rated at 60A.
The 10mm2 main earth conductor would only warrant a C3 departure.
The 6mm bonding would also only warrant a C3 so long as there are no signs of overheating and deterioration of the cable at its point of connection to the service it is bonded to.
It appears that the EICR has been completed by somebody not well versed in carrying out reports or with limited knowledge of what constitutes a dangerous condition or something that although doesn't comply with current standards still is fit for ongoing use.

 

[Andy78]

There are a few more Trev, but mainly relating to test results, and without being able to visit the properties and inspect and test myself I'm not willing to include those.

 

[rattlehead85]

EICR reporting over the last few years since the introduction of the Electrical Trainee courses has become a joke sadly.

 

[rattlehead85]

I have lost count of the number of reports i have seen where because circuitry has no RCD in a bathroom on an older installation it automatically becomes dangerous and gets given an unsatisfactory outcome.

 

[Leesparkykent]

I see a code 2 on an EICR the other day because the DB had an upfront RCD ! The customer showed me the quote for the remedial work but folded the company headed paper over so couldn't see what company it was. £900 to replace DB with main switch board and 4 RCBO's as only 4 circuits,replace 2x 2gang sockets and replace 1x Baton holder what a rip off! Any way the customer said I only used him because I got recommended him from a certain estate agent, as soon as she said that I knew who it was and he got his comeuppance in the wholesalers the other morning the robbing b***ard:icon12:

 

[Silly Sausage]

W@nkers.

I used to subby for a testing company and they were dishing out old code 2s for a 20A breaker on hotel room RFCs.
When I took over the job and stopped coding, the work seemed to dry up!!!

W@nkers.

 

[rattlehead85]

W@nkers.

I used to subby for a testing company and they were dishing out old code 2s for a 20A breaker on hotel room RFCs.
When I took over the job and stopped coding, the work seemed to dry up!!!

W@nkers.

Pure case of 'oh it doesn't say in the regs you can use a 20A mcb on a ring so it must be "DANGEROUS" '[emoji23][emoji23]

 

[Andy78]

Letter containing my findings with reference to the regs will be sent in the morning. We'll see how it goes.

 

[uksparks]

When I do an EICR or make any notes of departures etc I always write the rev number next to it so you can see where I got it from.

 

[rattlehead85]

When I do an EICR or make any notes of departures etc I always write the rev number next to it so you can see where I got it from.

Exactly what i used to do until the scammer scheme inspector told me to refrain from doing so as it "would cause confusion to the average person ordering the report seeing rows of numbers and symbols which mean nothing to them"

 

[Silly Sausage]

Pure case of 'oh it doesn't say in the regs you can use a 20A mcb on a ring so it must be "DANGEROUS" '[emoji23][emoji23]

It's pathetic!
I've always wondered what happened, half the hotel was coded 2, then the other half was clear :smilielol5:
Also, every inaccessible room CU was coded 3 because they didn't have a 'WARNING 230 VOLTS' sticker on them.


Name and shame..............
a Chesterfield testing company.

 

[Engineer54]

I think it's highly unlikely that you'll ever get to see a correctly recorded EICR, they must be as rare as Hens Teeth from what i can make of it!! lol!!

 

[rattlehead85]

I think it's highly unlikely that you'll ever get to see a correctly recorded EICR, they must be as rare as Hens Teeth from what i can make of it!! lol!!

Especially not when you consider the majority of new works completed nowadays mostly domestic wouldn't even get a satisfactory outcome let alone places 20 years + !!

 

[Octopus]

In the absence of understanding across the industry AND more improtantly with clients my point of reference is the Best Practice Guide from the electrical safety council.

Like it or not, at least its something a customer can access and read:

Best Practice Guides | Electrical Safety First

 

[rattlehead85]

This is a good publication anybody doing EICR reporting should carry this although the scammer schemes do not look favourably on some of its content yet they still endorse it.

 

[Andy78]

In the absence of understanding across the industry AND more improtantly with clients my point of reference is the Best Practice Guide from the electrical safety council.

Like it or not, at least its something a customer can access and read:

Best Practice Guides | Electrical Safety First

I have referenced this as well as the regs within my letter and attached a pdf copy of the best practice guide too.
It helps that the inspecting company's own scheme are stated as contributors to and endorsers of the guide.

 

[Octopus]

This is a good publication anybody doing EICR reporting should carry this although the scammer schemes do not look favourably on some of its content yet they still endorse it.

Who cares about them??

 

[HappyHippyDad]

I haven't read the whole thread Andy, but I doubt theres anyone who has agreed with the Code 2's.
I agree with you and dont think there should be any code for the 3 things you have mentioned.

BS3036 fuses are still in BS7671 so as long as they meet Zs times then they are fine.
As for the 6mm bonding and 10mm ME, have a look at the Best Practice Guide 6 (page 5, section 6.1 notes 2&3) It states the following:

2. A 6 mm2 or 10 mm2 earthing conductor used with an
associated line conductor of 25 mm2 could be considered
adequate if the requirements of Regulation 543.1.3 are met.

3. A 6 mm2 main protective bonding conductor size could be
deemed adequate where the minimum size required by
Regulation 544.1.1 of BS 7671 is 10 mm2, if the bonding
conductors have been in place for a significant time and show
no signs of thermal damage.

http://www.----------------------------/mediafile/100126672/Best-Practice-Guide-6.pdf

That should be enough ammunition for you :smile5: