- Reaction score
- 2,832
I doubt the IET have any control over what the ESC print, we in this country have the freedom to put whatever we like into print.
Someone could publish guidance advising people that in the absence of a cpc they should connect all exposed metalwork to neutral and the IET couldn't do a thing to stop them.
[automerge]1579561832[/automerge]
You are trying to mix two different concepts here, how an item is coded on an EICR and what I would do when required to carry out an alteration to an existing installation.
On an EICR, and if everything on the circuit is designated by the manufacturer as being class 2 (I don't think I've ever seen a switch which is marked as being class 2) and is in good condition without any deterioration then I would code it C3, I may still give an overall unsatisfactory assessment (yes this is allowed, C1 and C2 are automatic unsatisfactory results, but nothing prevents you giving an unsatisfactory result without a C1 or C2 item being present)
And I would certainly give a strong recommendation to rectify this in my covering letter.
However if I was asked to carry out an alteration to the circuit, including changing the CU which feeds it, I would advise that the circuit be rewired, and if this is not agreed by the customer I would decline to do the job.
Some good points Dave, and something I hadn't considered - you could indeed give an unsatisfactory outcome in the absence of C1s or C2s. I too have never come across a class 2 switch. That said, plastic switches aren't class 2, but I never heard of anyone getting a belt from a line-to-plastic-faceplate fault, so I think they're okay from that point of view.
I appreciate you and others here err on the side of caution, but that doesn't mean my take on this is wrong. The guide is backed up by the IET and other industry bodies as per Ian's post #54, it would be a very sorry state of affairs if it was giving incorrect advice.