cliffed

-
Arms
Went to an electrical chat about the 4th Amendment & EICR coding… FI will now be a satisfactory outcome
Green goo C2 even if IR passes..& a rewire if this is the case why not C2 cable with no Cpc… & rewire
RCD Type AC C3… any electronic equipment Do the test if it trips within the permitted times C3
What’s going on 😎
 
Coding is the opinion of the person undertaking the job not what some "electrical chat" is telling you. You can chose to make it unsatisfactory even if there are no Code 2, 3 or FI that is your perogative.
 
BS7671 doesn't tell us what to code any specific situation so that wont be a part of the amendment, it only tells us what the codes represent and it is up to us to make the decision as to what code applies to any particular situation.
 
Coding is the opinion of the person undertaking the job not what some "electrical chat" is telling you. You can chose to make it unsatisfactory even if there are no Code 2, 3 or FI that is your perogative.
They were NICEIC TECH people..there are so many different opinions & they are not even getting things correct 👍😎
 
BS7671 doesn't tell us what to code any specific situation so that wont be a part of the amendment, it only tells us what the codes represent and it is up to us to make the decision as to what code applies to any particular situation.
Agree it’s not part of the Amendment.. it was the talk on EICR codes which were concerning😎
 
The actual Draft is not published @ the moment but new wording for the codes have been issued
FI required. Its now FI recommended & will be A Satisfactory outcome
Unlike at present it’s Unsatisfactory
 
No you can still make it unsatisfactory. It states, at present Code1, 2 or FI present it must be unsatisfactory it does not say if you have Code 3 only it must be satisfactory so the same would apply even if you have no Code 1 or 2.
 
They were NICEIC TECH people..there are so many different opinions & they are not even getting things correct 👍😎
The NICEIC are not best placed to talk about EICR's when the quality of the EICR's produced by some of their registered contractors would be better printed on toilet paper.
You can't do an EICR remotely so why are these CPS organisations trying to do it by steering the decisions of the guy on the ground, a one size fits all scenario in a book does not fit all the variables of the conditions on site. It has become the sticking plaster for the sub standard training and acreditation that has become the norm over the last 20 years
 
Nothing I have read in BS7671, or in any guidance, suggests that we can give an unsatisfactory outcome to EICRs that don't contain C1's, C2's or FI's, and I don't believe we are intended to, based on the following:

Section E of the model form,

"An unsatisfactory assessment indicates that dangerous (code C1) and/or potentially dangerous (code C2) conditions have been identified."

This statement on the model form rather unhelpfully fails to mention FI, which is point 9 of the Notes for the person producing the Report:

"Where an observation requires further investigation (FI) because the inspection has revealed an apparent deficiency which could not, owing to the extent or limitations of the inspection, be fully identified and further investigation may reveal a code C1 or C2 item, this should be recorded within Section K, given the code FI and marked as unsatisfactory in Section E."

That last point also addresses the claim in post #1 about FI. An FI cannot have a satisfactory outcome, as there are potentially C1 or C2's there.
 
Just for fun, I put the above statements from the model forms into Chat GPT, and asked if an unsatisfactory outcome was possible in the absence of C1, C2 or FI codes. Here is what it came back with:

"Do you think an unsatisfactory outcome is possible in the absence of C1, C2, or FI codes?"

✅ Answer:​




Here's why:​


  1. C1 and C2: The first comment explicitly states that an unsatisfactory assessment occurs when dangerous (C1) or potentially dangerous (C2) conditions are present.
  2. FI: The second comment makes it clear that even in the absence of a confirmed C1 or C2, an FI code alone (due to the potential for hidden danger) also leads to an unsatisfactory outcome.
  3. Absence of C1, C2, and FI: If none of these codes are present, then by the logic of both statements:
    • There is no confirmed danger (C1 or C2),
    • There is no suspected but unconfirmed danger (FI),
    • Therefore, there is no basis for deeming the assessment unsatisfactory.



In short:​


  • ✅ C1, C2, or FI presentUnsatisfactory
  • ❌ No C1, C2, or FICannot be unsatisfactory
 
Doesn't change the fact it does not say it shall be satisfactory if 1, 2 and FI are not present.
 
Coding is the opinion of the person undertaking the job not what some "electrical chat" is telling you. You can chose to make it unsatisfactory even if there are no Code 2, 3 or FI that is your perogative.
Any item raised should be set against the requirements of the Wiring Regulations, not against the inspector’s personal judgement.
 
Last edited:
If the OP is referring to the Tech Talk at CEF live the 2 speakers were not NICEIC employees/representatives. Darren Staniforth long since left the NICEIC and I'm not sure that Dave Austin has been either. 2 senior members from the IET were also on stage. From what was said by the 4 presenters I did not take from it that FI would now be 'satisfactory' per se. I think that there is concern that the 'industry' uses FI codes too much when they shouldn't be.

IMO CPS bashing is a somewhat stale and boring pastime. There are good and bad testers. Some are members of a CPS and some aren't.
 
I did not take from it that FI would now be 'satisfactory' per se. I think that there is concern that the 'industry' uses FI codes too much when they shouldn't be.
Revised FI Code:
The definition of "Further Investigation" is proposed to change from "required without delay" to "recommended". This means that an FI code on an EICR will no longer automatically render the report as unsatisfactory.

Alignment with C3 Observations:
If the proposed changes are adopted, FIs would be grouped with C3 (Improvement Recommended) observations, potentially allowing for a "Satisfactory" outcome, depending on other factors.
 
Another amendment…. Another big book.
What colour this time?

Is this a definite future, or some multiversal tangent?
I’ve got multi colours in my wardrobe from 15th -18th … some money worth there
Brown, Red,Yellow, Blue ..Green any more?😎
Revised FI Code:
The definition of "Further Investigation" is proposed to change from "required without delay" to "recommended". This means that an FI code on an EICR will no longer automatically render the report as unsatisfactory.

Alignment with C3 Observations:
If the proposed changes are adopted, FIs would be grouped with C3 (Improvement Recommended) observations, potentially allowing for a "Satisfactory" outcome, depending on other factors.
Exactly What I tried to say…Yes!!!
 
Even if it gets a % of the questions correct it can’t be said to be worthless.

As already said @ #20
 
Even if it gets a % of the questions correct it can’t be said to be worthless.

As already said @ #20
Worth a read

Such a sweeping and uninformed claim is not only misleading but also grossly underestimates the monumental contributions AI has made to science, medicine, and technology. Let’s set the record straight with a few remarkable achievements of AI that prove its immense value and transformative power.

Revolutionizing Protein Discovery and Design

DeepMind, through its AlphaFold project, has predicted the structure of nearly every protein known to science. This groundbreaking achievement allows scientists to understand the building blocks of life with unprecedented precision. Protein structures are essential for developing new medicines and understanding diseases, and what used to take years of painstaking research can now be achieved in a matter of days thanks to AI.

Moreover, Evolutionary Scale models are pushing the boundaries even further by designing entirely new proteins. These novel proteins, which have never existed on Earth, could lead to breakthroughs in biotechnology, medicine, and environmental science. AI isn’t just accelerating current research; it’s opening doors to entirely new fields of discovery.

Material Science Leaps Forward

DeepMind’s AI has also made incredible strides in material science, discovering over 2 million new materials. This puts scientific progress hundreds of years ahead of where it would be without AI. These new materials have the potential to revolutionize everything from electronics to renewable energy, offering new solutions to some of humanity’s most pressing challenges.

AI in Medicine: Saving Lives and Time

The development of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine is a prime example of AI’s impact on medicine. Using AI, researchers conducted virtual clinical trials, significantly speeding up the vaccine’s development. This rapid response was crucial in the global fight against the pandemic, saving countless lives and allowing societies to return to a semblance of normalcy.

The Misconception of AI as Just ChatGPT

The statement that AI is “mostly useless” likely stems from a narrow view that equates AI solely with conversational agents like ChatGPT. While ChatGPT and similar models have their limitations and are often the most visible forms of AI, they represent only a small fraction of AI’s capabilities. AI encompasses a broad array of technologies and applications that are driving advancements across numerous fields.

Conclusion

To dismiss AI as useless is not only incorrect but also dangerously uninformed. The transformative potential of AI is evident in its contributions to protein discovery, material science, and medicine, among many other areas. Critics who reduce AI to a mere chatbot fail to recognize the profound and far-reaching impacts AI is having on our world. Before making such bold claims, it’s crucial to delve deeper into the subject, understand the full scope of AI’s capabilities, and acknowledge the incredible strides it has enabled in various fields of human endeavor.

In a world increasingly driven by technology, staying informed is not just a matter of professional relevance but also of intellectual responsibility. As AI continues to evolve and integrate into various aspects of our lives, its potential to drive progress and innovation will only grow. Let’s not allow uninformed opinions to overshadow the remarkable advancements AI is facilitating every day.
 
I did not say that AI is worthless I said that this particular statement from AI is worthless, a very different statement t

You said “that is an AI generated answer to the question so is worthless.” Even though imo the answer is correct which obviously isn’t worthless.

Enough said I think.
 

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Green 2 Go Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses Heating 2 Go
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

Daily, weekly or monthly email

Thread starter

cliffed

Arms
-
Joined
Location
Worcester
If you're a qualified, trainee, or retired electrician - Which country is it that your work will be / is / was aimed at?
United Kingdom
What type of forum member are you?
Electrical Engineer (Qualified)

Thread Information

Title
EICR/ Amendment
Prefix
N/A
Forum
Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification
Start date
Last reply date
Replies
34

Thread Tags

Tags Tags
eicr

Advert

Thread statistics

Created
cliffed,
Last reply from
littlespark,
Replies
34
Views
684

Advert

Back
Top