Electrical2Go - Online Electrical Supplier
This official sponsor may provide discounts for members

Discuss Landlords EICR and t&e sub mains without RCD in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

vitoboy

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

Hi All

Been doing a lot of EICR for landlords recently due to new legislation and agents i guess.
One common issue im finding even with relatively new (10 years) old installations is a T&E sub main.
Now some of these have a 100mA rcd .. or no RCD .. some are even wired in concentric cable.?..

My issue is that if they have no RCD we cant fit one because then we are putting the whole install on a single rcd which is no longer allowed and apart from that unwelcome by tenants when they need to go down stairs in the dark to find a RCD to reset every they plug in something rubbish.

So im left upgrading the submains to SWA ..as they should have been in the first place .. (they are typically buried in the wall and we cant prove they are more than 50mm deep) .
But in a few cases upgrading to SWA is a total nightmare if not impossible without destroying lots of the building to get them in.
Just wondering your thoughts on this and how you've been dealing with similar situations..or if you have any suggestions.
cheers
vitio
 

vitoboy

-
Arms
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
could you indulge me on your thoughts for that .. i was under the impression that its a domestic premises and any unprotected cable less than 50mm deep or in a wall with metal parts needed RCD protection via 30mA RCD..?
 

Andy78

-
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
2 potentially dangerous..
And then the landlord gets you to do remedials which include adding RCD protection for every circuit ? Can't be a bad thing.
Myself I code that particular instance a C3 in line with industry guidance.
 

vitoboy

-
Arms
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
And then the landlord gets you to do remedials which include adding RCD protection for every circuit ? Can't be a bad thing.
Myself I code that particular instance a C3 in line with industry guidance.
Not being funny at all .. but can anyone explain to me how this is not potentially dangerous. .. adding in this particular case that's it's a tt system. .
But I would say it's potentially dangerous if it was tncs or tns
 
Now you mention TT so the biggest issue is fault protection if no rcd is in place.
 

vitoboy

-
Arms
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
Yep.. it's really a requirement here..
But some persons I know have suggested that I do a eicr starting at the consumer unit in the flat and ignore the sub main..? as is external..
But really I'm not happy with this.
 

Andy78

-
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
Not being funny at all .. but can anyone explain to me how this is not potentially dangerous. .. adding in this particular case that's it's a tt system. .
But I would say it's potentially dangerous if it was tncs or tns
Avoiding the need for fault protection via RCD for TT for now, a different issue, the hazard that exists with buried cables only occurs when destruction of the wall and electrical installation occurs. If that is a defining parameter then a socket may be worthy of a C2 in case you hit it with a sledgehammer.
 

Wilko

-
Arms
Esteemed
Hi - for TT I’d use a 100mA S type (time delayed) RCD up front for fault protection. The time delay is normally sufficient to allow the regular RCDs / RCBOs to trip for any final circuit faults.
 
N

Nigel

Not being funny at all .. but can anyone explain to me how this is not potentially dangerous. .. adding in this particular case that's it's a tt system. .
But I would say it's potentially dangerous if it was tncs or tns
You are the one C2ing it. You tell us what the potential danger is of cables in a wall with no RCD additional protection.
 

Wilko

-
Arms
Esteemed
That won’t comply. Cables buried in walls need to have 30mA additional protection.
Oops, I forgot this was also a problem to be solved. If they’ve put the unprotected sub main in a wall less than 50mm then my 100mA S type is no good .
 
N

Nigel

Personally I think the cost to install SWA or surface cabling is too high when compared to the safety improvement. If I was the landlord I would not bother installing additional RCD protection for cables in walls in these properties and ensure S Type 100mA RCDs were installed for all sub-distribution circuits on TT supplies.
 

Charlie_

-
Arms
Are the consumer units plastic?
 

vitoboy

-
Arms
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #20
Eerr
You can see a socket ....
You can't see a buried cable..
You can screw into the live then lick the screw ... if your that way inclined..
No operation of any protective device..
Is this not the point..?
 

richy3333

-
Mentor
Arms
Supporter
Esteemed
C3 all the way. No way a C2
 

Andy78

-
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
Eerr
You can see a socket ....
You can't see a buried cable..
You can screw into the live then lick the screw ... if your that way inclined..
No operation of any protective device..
Is this not the point..?
It's sort of the point, if your point was that you cannot possibly protect against every random eventuality and so coding should be realistic based on normal use of the installation. But I don't think that was your intended point, just what I inferred from that.
 

vitoboy

-
Arms
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #24
It's sort of the point, if your point was that you cannot possibly protect against every random eventuality and so coding should be realistic based on normal use of the installation. But I don't think that was your intended point, just what I inferred from that.
Why do we fit RCDs for stuff buried in a wall less than 50mm deep if not to guard against things that aren't "normal use"??
 

Wilko

-
Arms
Esteemed
To me, the “cables in walls” reg came as a safety improvement, but not having it wouldn’t automatically mean the installation was unsafe.
 

vitoboy

-
Arms
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #28
Because if I am the inspector I am suitably competent, qualified and experienced enough to judge a T&E ‘sub main’ as was described in the original OP as a C3 :)
Ok I accept that point of view.
This is why Im Posting this .. because I value the feedback here.
At this time I'm not completely sure i agree completely.
The thing that worries me is just that we have the current regs for a reason .. this goes against them.
I need to be happy with what I'm doing .. so I seek consensus...not just cost cutting for landlords.
I thank you for your points.
 

vitoboy

-
Arms
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #30
For me right now .
Both.
But I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise .. but I'm not yet.
With tt anyhow
With tncs or tns yes its additional... but it's still a requirement really unless someone can show me something that says different.
 
CK Tools :) The professionals choice when it comes to Electrical Tools
This official sponsor may provide discounts for members

Reply to Landlords EICR and t&e sub mains without RCD in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

Wetroom Store - Network Wetroom Suppliers
This official sponsor may provide discounts for members
Top Bottom