Eicr question

[rapidrich]

If a shower was fitted 15 years back and had no rcd what cat would it be on a eicr

 

[Octopus]

None. You are not testing to the 17th regs.

 

[DurhamSparky]

code 3 ...... improvement if no supp bonding in bathroom!

 

[rapidrich]

That's what I've all ways thought but a sparky has gone to do some wrk there and said it should be cat 2

 

[DurhamSparky]

i can see why he has done that!! as MOST showers stipulate protection by RCD...

end of the day the PIR is based on what you deem safe/unsafe.... nobodys decisions or suggestions should influence YOUR decision

 

[martinxxxxxx]

Well if there is no supp bonding and that was required to limit the different potentials of exposed metalwork then this is potentially dangerous so I would code it as a C2 unless there was an RCD fitted to all circuits in the bathroom and main bonding was present.
What you have to watch for here IMO is that while the electrical installation (fuseboard etc) maybe as they were when installed, most often the bathroom has had a make over -during which the supp bonding was not re-installed. In this case the person ordering the work has a choice re-instigate the supp bonding or upgrade board (and bonding).

From 4. Periodic inspection of existing domestic and similar installations : Electrical Safety CouncilQ4.4
What Classification Code should be given if it is found that there is no supplementary bonding in a bathroom having extraneous- or exposed-conductive-parts, and the conditions given in Regulation 701.415.2 for its omission are not met?
[FONT=&amp]Classification Code C2. Where the presence of supplementary bonding cannot be confirmed by inspection, it may be verified by a continuity test (< 0.05 ?)[/FONT]

 

[rapidrich]

My thoughts are its safe but not to current standards I.e not as safe as it could be

 

[martinxxxxxx]

Not according to the ESC Electrical Safety Council
From 4. Periodic inspection of existing domestic and similar installations : Electrical Safety CouncilQ4.4
What Classification Code should be given if it is found that there is no supplementary bonding in a bathroom having extraneous- or exposed-conductive-parts, and the conditions given in Regulation 701.415.2 for its omission are not met?
[FONT=&amp]Classification Code C2. Where the presence of supplementary bonding cannot be confirmed by inspection, it may be verified by a continuity test (< 0.05 ?)[/FONT]

Read more: http://www.electriciansforums.net/e...-forum/66428-eicr-question.html#ixzz2AFI0i151
​

 

[martinxxxxxx]

That is the official guidance - if you do not follow it and someone is killed - you better have your PIA up to date

 

[Octopus]

Not according to the ESC Electrical Safety Council
From 4. Periodic inspection of existing domestic and similar installations : Electrical Safety CouncilQ4.4
What Classification Code should be given if it is found that there is no supplementary bonding in a bathroom having extraneous- or exposed-conductive-parts, and the conditions given in Regulation 701.415.2 for its omission are not met?
Classification Code C2. Where the presence of supplementary bonding cannot be confirmed by inspection, it may be verified by a continuity test (< 0.05 ?)

Read more: http://www.electriciansforums.net/e...-forum/66428-eicr-question.html#ixzz2AFI0i151
​

The OP didn't mention supplementary bonding!!

 

[DurhamSparky]

i know... i just stated my opinion on the codes!

 

[martinxxxxxx]

But he is talking about Regulation 701.415.2 and this is conditional on whether the install meets the regs in force at the time - so it is pertinent that the Supp boning should be met - if it is then it is a C3 possibly if not it is certainly a C2 according to the advice from the esc

 

[Guest55]

None. You are not testing to the 17th regs.

what are you testing to ?
;-D

 

[rapidrich]

Bonding is fine my question was just regarding the rcd thanx

 

[martinxxxxxx]

If the bonding is fine then if it is is someone own home a C3 if it is a rented accommodation C2

 

[somersetsparks]

c3 then IMO

 

[somersetsparks]

If the bonding is fine then if it is is someone own home a C3 if it is a rented accommodation C2

How can you differentiate the 2, its a C3 in my book, you could install new it like it in 2008, it hasnt become 'potentially dangerous' since then. Bonding is in place. RCDs are no magic bullett

 

[martinxxxxxx]

When you do an inspection the reason for the inspection and the type of use of the building and the users has to be taken in to account. Landlords have a duty of care under law towards their tenants.
The ESC is calling on landlords to ensure that there is adequate RCD protection in all of their properties as fewer than half of UK households (49%) have adequate RCD protection and the number drops to just 30% for private tenants. A Residual Current Device (RCD) is a life-saving device that protects against dangerous electric shock and reduces the risk of electrical fires. Plug-in RCDs should be used if there is no RCD in the fusebox.

Press Releases News : Electrical Safety Council

Extract

By law, landlords must ensure electrical installations and wiring are maintained in a safe condition throughout the tenancy . And tenants should feel obliged to flag electrical problems as soon as they appear, as well as maintain any electrical items they bring into the house. The consequences for not understanding obligations can be serious. If a landlord is found to be negligent over electrical safety it can lead to prosecution, with a fine of up to £5,000 on each count or imprisonment. This may come as a shock to the 38% of landlords who don’t believe there are any penalties for failing to maintain safety.

​

 

[Guest55]

Its code 3 regardless of bathroom bonding or not.
From the ESC EICR guidlines giving examples of C3's ;

"Absence of RCD protection in a location containing a bath or shower where satisfactory suplementary bonding is present "

Its all there , clear as crystal but nobody could be arsed looking the facts up properly.
Apart from me ;-)

 

[martinxxxxxx]

Please may we see the link to this information