UK Help understand the EICR please

[Bok328]

I’d really appreciate some help understanding these results from an EICR. The report showed that 4.17 was in C2 and I’ve been told I need a new metal consumer unit. The reason was that some circuits are not protected. My flat is around 17 years old and the consumer unit and the report are as follows. Thanks you very much!

 

[littlespark]

First of all, can you fully redact any personal details of the tester and company, and re upload the pdf.
I’ve added screenshots of the important bits.

The C3 mentions condition of accessories. We don’t know how bad it is, but if broken to the point of showing exposed live parts, then that should be a C2

The C2 seems to point to some circuits not rcd protected, and I believe the tester has been too strict here.

Also mixed up the the A and mA values of the rcd on the schedule of test results.

 

[newfutile]

4.17 is for fault protection, unless it's a TT earthing system it's unlikely rcd is for fault protection more likely for additional protection.
Maybe ask the inspector what this means?
Also I doubt the rcd is a BS62423, picture is not that clear but I would guess at a BS 61008 (RCD) Residual Current Device

 

[Bok328]

Sorry about that, it is the updated version. Thank you for all your replies.

 

[plugsandsparks]

He has it down as TNCS, so its additional, i guess. Either way it wouldn't take much effort to pop another RCD in the gap and clean up the cooker and CH. Its a fair cop, OP just needs to get it done. No need for a new CU

 

[Bok328]

He has it down as TNCS, so its additional, i guess. Either way it wouldn't take much effort to pop another RCD in the gap and clean up the cooker and CH. Its a fair cop, OP just needs to get it done. No need for a new CU

Thank you for the reply. Do you recommend I need to replace the whole consumer unit with a metal one?

 

[brianmoooore]

I saw the name of the company involved before it was redacted, and my immediate reaction was that it was a business that I'd be wary of becoming involved with.
It's TNC-S, the RCD is for additional protection, the installation is in good condition, and was installed to the regs at the time.
Undoubtably the safety of the installation would be increased by a shiny new CU with RCBO protection to all circuits and surge protection, but this is an EICR, not a request for advice, so this is almost certainly an unashamed attempt to create extra work and profit.

 

[brianmoooore]

Do you recommend I need to replace the whole consumer unit with a metal one?

Don't think they even flagged the plastic CU as a C3, which it should have been.

 

[PS Electrics]

I’d really appreciate some help understanding these results from an EICR. The report showed that 4.17 was in C2 and I’ve been told I need a new metal consumer unit. The reason was that some circuits are not protected. My flat is around 17 years old and the consumer unit and the report are as follows. Thanks you very much!

View attachment 122205

Great advert for NICEIC with this standard

EICR is sloppy several mistakes

A few

Ipf the same at origin and DB
3 items supposed to have codes but only 2 mentioned
Note says some circuits do not have RCD but 4.17 instead of 4.18 coded
RCD A and mA swapped as Littespark said
IR readings look suss at 250 like the voltage used copied over and not >199 or >999 but that is minor
No mention of Consumer Unit change required on report.

 

[westward10]

Clearly undertaken by someone who is not too competent and just to add to the above they have also ticked phase sequence probably because they had no idea what it means (wouldn't be done for a single phase installation).
If you have had this done for your own benefit and not for rental or sale I wouldn't be losing sleep over it that does not need replacing.

 

[westward10]

It doesn't shock me that someone has apparently QSd that and left all the errors in.

 

[Bok328]

Clearly undertaken by someone who is not too competent and just to add to the above they have also ticked phase sequence probably because they had no idea what it means (wouldn't be done for a single phase installation).
If you have had this done for your own benefit and not for rental or sale I wouldn't be losing sleep over it that does not need replacing.

The flat is rented out. So does it mean I have to change it by regulations? Thanks

 

[westward10]

The flat is rented out. So does it mean I have to change it by regulations? Thanks

That is a problem seeing as you have a Code 2 which will need to be addressed.
I would personally be going back to them to justify the Report which is poorly compiled and grammatically incorrect. There is no mention in the Report that your consumer unit is not metal and I would be asking them to also justify the Code 2 in which the general concensus would be to award a Code 3.
Tell them a third party has reviewed it and found errors which have been overlooked by the individual who tested it and the QS who reviewed it and that you have a mind to forward it to the NICEIC.

 

[PS Electrics]

It doesn't shock me that someone has apparently QSd that and left all the errors in.

You would hope the QS had their back.

The QS can't have even looked at this and just signed it.

The QS there needs to be reminded of their responsibilities and the legal ramifications.

Court case a few years ago Spark got off but QS who signed off the work got it in the neck.

 

[westward10]

They also have the fuse/device rating or setting of the main switch as 240 when it almost certainly should be NA.

 

[Bok328]

4.17 is for fault protection, unless it's a TT earthing system it's unlikely rcd is for fault protection more likely for additional protection.
Maybe ask the inspector what this means?
Also I doubt the rcd is a BS62423, picture is not that clear but I would guess at a BS 61008 (RCD) Residual Current Device

 

[Bok328]

I guess you are right, the RCD should be BS 61008, do I need to change it to 62423?

4.17 is for fault protection, unless it's a TT earthing system it's unlikely rcd is for fault protection more likely for additional protection.
Maybe ask the inspector what this means?
Also I doubt the rcd is a BS62423, picture is not that clear but I would guess at a BS 61008 (RCD) Residual Current Device

 

[westward10]

Why do you need to change it?

 

[buzzlightyear]

5.11 Cables concealed under floors, above ceilings or in walls/partitions, adequately protected against damage (see Section 4. Extent and Limitations) (522.6.204) Pass
yeah what is the spark pass that ,what is he superman ,should be N/V .

 

[littlespark]

Was this an independent sparky, or someone a letting agent recommended?

I didn't see those other issues on first look.... but, blimey, its a corker.


OK... now we know its a rental property, would it be worth getting the CU changed so its as safe for your tenants as it can be?
Shouldn't cost much more than one months rent, give or take.... but gives you peace of mind.


And, we say it all the time, you don't have to use the same company to do the work than those that did the report.

 

[Bok328]

Is it possible just to add a new RCD in the consumer unit? Or is it easier just to replace the whole consumer unit? Thanks

 

[littlespark]

It’s possible that you do nothing with it all, but get a second opinion.

If you go with a replacement…. You get everything rcd protected, you get the SPD, and you get a metal CU…. Which could all likely be flagged up (even as a C3) on any future EICR if you don’t change it now.

Getting it changed completely would also give you an EIC for the work, which could negate the need for another EICR.

 

[plugsandsparks]

Its possible, as suggested earlier. Dual RCD boards were around during that period although there was a change when 17th came out. My first thought was that it was a dual RCD board and someone had converted it to single RCD, hence the large hole.
Its a ---- up between a quick fix with a relatively expensive RCD, vs, nice new shiny CU, either way you will need to find an electrician to do it so its them you have to discuss this with

 

[richy3333]

Don't think they even flagged the plastic CU as a C3, which it should have been.

Not sure I am missing something. Why should the CU be a C3? Is the CU located under a wooden staircase or in a position where it is in the sole means of escape in the event of a fire?

 

[brianmoooore]

Not sure I am missing something. Why should the CU be a C3? Is the CU located under a wooden staircase or in a position where it is in the sole means of escape in the event of a fire?

Simply because it does not conform to the current regulations. C3 means "improvement recommended", and since the powers that be have seen fit to change the requirement for the casing of a CU to (in effect) steel, it would seem likely that they consider it an "improvement".

 

[richy3333]

Simply because it does not conform to the current regulations. C3 means "improvement recommended", and since the powers that be have seen fit to change the requirement for the casing of a CU to (in effect) steel, it would seem likely that they consider it an "improvement".

Neither BPG4 (industry accepted) nor NAPIT guide (Not totally Industry accepted) recommend a code C3 simply if it's just because the CU is plastic. There has to something else which is and issue, combined with it being plastic to command a coding.

 

[westward10]

4.4 of the Inspection Schedule asks the question and specifies the Regulation applicable to consumer units so to ignore it would be negligent regardless of what these Guides imply.

 

[UNG]

It doesn't shock me that someone has apparently QSd that and left all the errors in.

I doubt many proof read what is noted ticked or otherwise written, I do wonder if some of these companies use a standard template at times due to the stupid and basic errors that consistantly appear or is it just a lack of knowledge and training

You would hope the QS had their back.

The QS can't have even looked at this and just signed it.

The QS there needs to be reminded of their responsibilities and the legal ramifications.

Court case a few years ago Spark got off but QS who signed off the work got it in the neck.

If you look at numbers if you have a company with 10 operatives doing 2 EICR's a day 5 days a week the QS does not and will not have the time to check them all
It is like the NICEIC and NAPIT annual assessments in a large company how many operatives are assessed as being competent to carry out EICR's yet the company will be signed off as competent by the CPS having assessed the QS

5.11 Cables concealed under floors, above ceilings or in walls/partitions, adequately protected against damage (see Section 4. Extent and Limitations) (522.6.204) Pass
yeah what is the spark pass that ,what is he superman ,should be N/V .

Could it be that when you are doing 4 - 5 EICR's a day you don't have the time to read what you are passing or ticking or are you using pre filled reports with minimal or limited info added for each site

 

[littlespark]

I always start with a completely blank EICR. No pre-filled values or tickboxes.

I have to type something on, even if it’s “N/A” or a dash.