Discuss Eicr no CPC on lighting circuit in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:   American Electrical Advice Forum

Best Practice Guides are not something I use and Class II protection cannot be used in a dwelling.
Fair comment. As I said it's up to the person signing the EICR to decide.
Interestingly, when I joined the NICEIC EICR register, I had to agree to use the electrical safety first best practice guide 4 when assessing what code to give.Eicr no CPC on lighting circuit Screenshot_20201213-151416_Edge - EletriciansForums.net
 
Last edited:
RCBOs do not need a CPC to operate effectively.

Your assessor is disagreeing with the Electrical Safety First best practice guides. The guide on EICR reporting recommends a C3 where there is a lack of CPC in a circuit supplying items of all insulated all class 2 equipment.
He is of course entitled to his own opinion, but it is up to the inspector to decide whether it's C3 or C2.
NAPIT (and therefore STROMA) have put their name to that guide, so he's disagreeing with his own scheme's guidance
 
Just one further point of clarification:
I have come across this situation (no CPCs to lighting circuits) several times over the last few years.
In each and every case my EICR code given was a C2.
Also, in each and every case, I did my utmost to convince the client that the first and best option is to rewire the circuits.
Then the 2nd best option would be to run a separate CPC to all the points of the circuit (which is probably more problematic than to rewire the circuit).
Then, as an absolute last resort (maybe lack of finances or only just decorated), to change all accessories and lights to all insulated, with a warning notice on the consumer unit. And with a view to having the circuits rewired in the near future.
To be fair, all but one of the clients agreed to the rewiring of the circuits.

Which raises the question, if the client genuinely cannot afford the cost of rewiring the circuit at this time, do you leave them with a potentially dangerous C2 situation? Or do you offer them the last resort suggested by Electrical Safety First? (Whose board members include IET directors and NICEIC technical directors).
Or do you have any other alternative solutions?
 
Which raises the question, if the client genuinely cannot afford the cost of rewiring the circuit at this time, do you leave them with a potentially dangerous C2 situation?
Other than metallic switches, or possibly light fittings above a bath or similar, where it is possible to touch the fitting while being in contact with something at earth potential (radiator, taps, etc) it is hard to see how it would be a C2, which is basically what BPG4 says (quoted below is for C2 rating):
  • Absence of a circuit protective conductor for a lighting circuit supplying items of Class I equipment, or connected to switches having metallic face plates
So I would go with BPG1 and verify there is no current issue with insulation and change the light switch plates to basic plastic ones. But only if it was the only realistic option.

Edited to add: While not directly related, 410.3.9 (iii) has provision for reduced protection for small parts that present a low risk of significant contact or the ability to be gripped, so things like the face plate screws don't really need covering as they are unlikely to allow enough shock current to be dangerous (assume the person is not soaking wet, of course).
 
Last edited:
Other than metallic switches, or possibly light fittings above a bath or similar, where it is possible to touch the fitting while being in contact with something at earth potential (radiator, taps, etc) it is hard to see how it would be a C2, which is basically what BPG4 says (quoted below is for C2 rating):
  • Absence of a circuit protective conductor for a lighting circuit supplying items of Class I equipment, or connected to switches having metallic face plates
So I would go with BPG1 and verify there is no current issue with insulation and change the light switch plates to basic plastic ones. But only if it was the only realistic option.

Edited to add: While not directly related, 410.3.9 (iii) has provision for reduced protection for small parts that present a low risk of significant contact or the ability to be gripped, so things like the face plate screws don't really need covering as they are unlikely to allow enough shock current to be dangerous (assume the person is not soaking wet, of course).
I’m glad you brought the regulation up because people are convinced in changing the fixing screws to nylon or putting caps over the heads, which is a ridiculously waste of time.
 

Reply to Eicr no CPC on lighting circuit in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
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
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by Untold Media. Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock