Eicr - who can do remedial work

[Baddegg]

If that was the case I'd have a legitimate reason to get out of doing EICRs, I don't have any inspection and testing qualifications.

Not being nosey Dave just curious, can I ask why you’ve not bothered with that qual?....I just assumed someone with your level of knowledge would have it,

 

[davesparks]

Not being nosey Dave just curious, can I ask why you’ve not bothered with that qual?....I just assumed someone with your level of knowledge would have it,

I have never had a need to do it, I learned testing as part of my apprenticeship and I keep myself up to date with the changing requirements of the regulations.
Not having it has never held me back so I don't feel any need to do it.

The various NIC assessors I've had over the years have always been satisfied that I am competent to carry out inspection and testing so have never recommended that I do the course.

 

[EricMark]

When I did C&G 2381 around 2002 I think there were three courses and exams done one after the other, so I continued doing the two testing courses after it. It also mean when the 2382 came out I could do short course and exam.

However don't think it really taught me anything I did not already know, and when doing the exam we were given a test board, and I noted there was a poor connection some where in the board as the loop impedance was too high in the sockets. It seems the board builders had included resistors to give the same sort of reading one would expect with a house, and I was right to condemn the sockets as had they been used the resistors would have over heated and caused a fire, but it seems I was the first to note the reading was too high given the length of run. Those before me had just accepted they were within the limits.

But to know what to expect comes with experience, not training or exams, I am sure like any electrician who tests every installation if I was so inclined I could fudge up a set of results without my meters very close to actual readings, I wouldn't but I could, because over the years I have got to know what to expect. And when I was told to run 6 mm cable to a socket in a factory I told my boss before starting think that needs to be 10 mm for that distance, it was however no consultation when proved right, as I also had to run the replacement.

But when I did my exam there was a code 4 which was does not comply with current edition of BS7671, I liked code 4 as it told people they would need to upgrade before they could alter the installation, however it was considered it lead to confusion, and we only needed to point out dangers and potential dangers and give recommendations, we don't need to point out when it does not comply with current regulations, I think that is wrong, the owners need to know, but we need some standardisation in testing standards so if the IET says you don't need code 4 then you don't use code 4 the C in front of the code shows using the new system.

There has also been some talk about F1, it has been common in the past not to inspect loft spaces where there was no access, it was common for a row of terrace houses only to have a loft hatch in one house of the terrace, and if the house you were inspecting did not have the hatch then you didn't inspect the loft, it has been made plain that is not acceptable, likely because of tapping onto power for illegal use, however in the past F1 was not considered a fail.

The requirements of BS7671 are fair enough, and if some thing changes like earthing in a bathroom that is also fair enough, where the problem lies is where subsequent editions clarifies what was required, so if a circuit for example is "An assembly of electrical equipment supplied from the same origin and protected against overcurrent by the same protective device(s)." and we consider this means the MCB divides the supply into circuits, and then it is clarified by "reduce the possibility of unwanted tripping of RCDs due to excessive protective conductor currents produced by equipment in normal operation." in a latter edition showing the RCD is being considered as forming a circuit, then that leaves us with a problem.

So the home built in 2000 with just two RCD's may have been considered ahead of its time when built, and we saw nothing wrong with only two RCD's but the occupants have been complaining they trip every so often, and you know in your heart of hearts for that size house two RCD's did not cut the mustard, and never has, OK it does not really produce a potential danger any more than a general power cut would so it will not get a code C2, but is an example of some thing that has not really changed, it has only been clarified, so it has always been contra to regulations.

There is also the electrical installation that still does not break any electrical rules, but you know is potentially dangerous, for example splitting the house sockets into upper and lower floor which means if one fails it is likely extension leads will be used up/down stairs, where really it should be split side to side not only to stop the stairs danger but lowers loop impedance and better shares the load. However to correct would need a rewire, so we tend not to even talk about it.

 

[westward10]

It is FI not F1.