Discuss Failed EICR Query in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

Reaction score
2
Hello all, hoping for a little advice from you kind people :)

My friend has been told to change consumer unit by the people who did the EICR, at a cost of £600, which i think sounds excessive. It seems to only need a new RCBO and blanking plate(s) fitted? I guess a photo of the existing unit might be beneficial.

What are your thoughts? Also, is the C2 for the failed RCBO?

Thanks in advance.
 

Attachments

  • eicr.png
    241.3 KB · Views: 70
Looks like there's more than 1 RCD needed and other issues with the CU

600 seems excessive just for a CU change although there will be additional testing required afterwards
 
i class the missing blank as a C2 as there's no immediate danger. potential as in one has to insert one's fingerand then manage to touch a live part. with modern MCBs that's very unlikely as the live terminals are recessed in the housing.

i would have fitted a blank rather than take twice as long to put the comment on the report.
 
C1 for missing blank if there’s exposed live busbar
same situation as bare live cables exposed… just as dangerous.

a C2 is something like an earth not connected. Everything works fine until a second fault causes exposed metal to go live…no ADS… then becomes a C1
 
Missing blank is a C1 any day of the week.
Item 4 is a C3

£600 for a board change is not unreasonable but may be unnecessary in this instance, but who knows as we cant see the whole report?
so how would you code a similar size hole in the top of the CU, compromising the IP4X? a finger could still getin but unless said finger is 7" (ooh, matron), can't actually reach a live part.C2 in my book.
 
C1 or C2 depending on my engineering judgement, but a missing blank giving rise to immediate access to live parts is a C1 IMHO.

Other than that I cant comment upon your theoretical scenario and it would be futile to do so ?
 
as i said in a previous post, i'd just bung a blank in, maybe with a spot of superglue. far less trouble and time than coding it.
 
as i said in a previous post, i'd just bung a blank in, maybe with a spot of superglue. far less trouble and time than coding it.
So would I, but in theory, at least, the missing blank should attract a C1, since you are testing and reporting on the installation as is.
A similar thing can occur when you submit your car for an MOT test. Any reasonable tester will stick a litre or two of water into the washer bottle if it's empty, or replace a failed compulsory lamp (assuming easy access), if these are the only things it will fail on, but they're not supposed to.
 
A photo of the unit and more of the report would be handy. Whether it's fixable rather than requiring replaceable depends on the brand and age of the consumer unit.
I note in the summary there's an RCBO failing it's test which I'm assuming is coded on a continuation sheet.

The C2 appears to relate to lighting; the sparks was a NAPIT member and the tester is at liberty to follow their codebreakers book rather than the industry standard best practise guide 4 which would have it as a C3.

(Just noticed - academic interest only - ever so slightly high Ze for a TNCS on that report.)
 
Thank you guys :)

Its both helpful and interesting reading all your comments, and i am grateful. I should have posted more of the EICR, I've attached it below.

If it were my home id troubleshoot it myself, unfortunately i don't have access to the house. Hopefully i can get hold of a photo of the unit.
The price for a change of consumer unit i didn't have issue with, I'm just querying whether or not it is strictly necessary, or are they are creating work where it may not be needed. It seems to be the norm these days, across many professions.
I know ideally, all circuits should be protected, and if that involves changing the unit, then it should be recommended to the customer, but that's not how it was communicated to her.
However, maybe there is something in this report that indicates that actually it is necessary in this case and that's why I posted here to read the various opinions of experienced people so that she could make an informed decision. Access to the advice of professionals here in invaluable in situations like this.

Here's the rest of the report including the original jpeg from the original post.

Once again thank you.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    125.3 KB · Views: 43
  • Untitled2.png
    233.5 KB · Views: 41
  • Untitled3.png
    255.6 KB · Views: 37
  • eicr.png
    241.3 KB · Views: 44
I wouldn't say it's a bad report and it's generally a lot better than some we see on here. The issues have been found, it's a matter of the severity of them really.

Strictly speaking, to satisfy the findings, the first one is easy, as said above fit a blank.
The C2 - Cable's wouldn't be allowed to be directly buried in walls < 50mm deep without RCD protection today. How to code it in older installs is one of the things that is interpreted differently by different people. The industry best practise guide says it's a C3. A guide produced by the scheme the electrician belongs to says it's a C2. To fix that would involve adding RCD protection to all circuits. And here the fun starts.

I'd say the consumer unit is quite an old one as the breaker sizes are B5 and B30, not B6 and B32 which have been common for a long time. It's interesting there was an (early?) RCBO available for it at all, someone might be able to identify it from that alone. ( @westward10 ?)

I can't imagine being able to easily upgrade that board and add RCD protection as the parts probably won't be sitting on shelves (new), and it will become an eBay scouring job. The same applies to the failed RCBO.
So the consumer unit's age might dictate it's replacement anyway due to lack of parts.

Personally I probably wouldn't have given a C2 for the buried cables, but would have been advising replacement anyway. If thought there was a socket that could potential supply equipment outdoors I might have added a C2 for lack of working RCD protection and we arrive back at the same place.

(I'd also be suggesting a return visit in 6-12 months to measure the external earth loop impendence again as it's right on the limit for the earthing type. (0.37 ohms, limit is 0.35 ohms). If it stays static, fair enough. If it has worsened the supplier need contacting as it's their problem.)
 
I know Memshield 1 and Wylex QEB produced 60898 5A devices but what throws that theory is the single pole rcbo which would not have been available. If it were a Wylex standard board which it almost certainly isn't then it is possible as GE produced plug in 60898 5A, 15A and 30A devices. A picture would be ideal.
 
Thanks again.

So the NAPIT scheme explains the C2 and the consumer unit is likely very old and difficult to get parts for. A photo really would bloody help :D

Can anyone confirm that a "retest" is not needed should a different electrician to the one the did the EICR is used to complete the remedial work. All that is needed is proof the problems were rectified?
 
Can anyone confirm that a "retest" is not needed should a different electrician to the one the did the EICR is used to complete the remedial work. All that is needed is proof the problems were rectified
Correct. Though a CU change (seemingly only viable solution) should result in an EIC certificate and the work being notified to building control.
 

Reply to Failed EICR Query in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

Similar Threads

Afternoon all, Just wondering what everyone's response to the following scenario is. Letting agents have asked us to carry out an EICR. There was...
Replies
42
Views
5K
Just had an EICR done and C2 (dangerous) applied to 3-way consumer unit which is exclusively for 3 x Storage Heaters. Pic below. Yes its plastic...
Replies
24
Views
2K
Hello. Non-electrician here. Failed an EICR yesterday as the electrician graded my consumer unit C2. Why C2 and not C3? He didn't say (and still...
Replies
22
Views
3K
Hello, I have a hypothetical question (I'm an electrical engineer) to better understand RCBOs and how they are used in the USA. Let's say I would...
Replies
9
Views
963
Hello all, I have just got back an EICR report thats unsatisfactory. It has 2 x c2 flags, one is for insuficiant RCD and the other is for...
Replies
12
Views
2K

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