No RCD domestic lighting

[Daveh36]

Firstly sorry if this has been asked before. Carrying out alot of EICRs because of the new rental laws. Keep coming across boards with just one RCD. Lighting circuits not protected normally I issue a C2 for this and had no problems but one landlord who thinks he knows everything has queried my decision today What would you guys give it C2 or C3

 

[Baddegg]

C3 at best.....is it dangerous?

 

[dodger421]

Why do you normally issue a C2?

Surely if the circuit hasn’t been altered or extended, tests ok and there are no obvious signs of damage to fixtures and fittings then it’s a C3, improvement recommended?

 

[Daveh36]

Well has the potential to be otherwise why change the regs in the first place
[automerge]1593719072[/automerge]
I issue C2 as that is what I was advised by Stroma when I was with them before I changes that is

 

[dodger421]

I don’t have the BBB here, but I’m pretty sure there’s a statement right near the front from the HSE about older installations installed to previous editions not being inherently unsafe just because the regulations have changed to improve safety.

Obviously some things that were allowed were dangerous and hence became banned, but additional protection by RCD is just that, additional protection.

 

[Baddegg]

I’m with stroma and don’t c2 no rcd....regs arnt retrospective and I don’t think the point of this legislation is to hammer landlords, just to ensure the installation is safe for continued use?

 

[Daveh36]

So not retrospective take a bathroom with a pendant light or a batten lamp holder clearly not IP rated would you just leave it and say it's fine. An outside socket fitted before RCD were fitted would that be ok. Think I'm just going to stick to my guns on this one. If they dont like my comments they can go else where. When its safety I always ere on the safer side just for the sake of a a few quid

 

[westward10]

Well has the potential to be otherwise why change the regs in the first place
[automerge]1593719072[/automerge]
I issue C2 as that is what I was advised by Stroma when I was with them before I changes that is

What was your opinion before the brains trust at Stroma gave their unconsidered opinion. Any electrical system has the potential for danger.

 

[Daveh36]

Like I said for the sake of an rcbo or additional rcd in the board for a few quid is it really worth taking unnecessary risks. We wouldn't fit things with out an rcd today would we.
My opinion right or wrong is it could be potentially dangerous

 

[Baddegg]

Like I said for the sake of an rcbo or additional rcd in the board for a few quid is it really worth taking unnecessary risks. We wouldn't fit things with out an rcd today would we.
My opinion right or wrong is it could be potentially dangerous

That’s why I’d c3 it, make the owner aware...end of the day all it comes down to is the inspectors opinion ?

 

[radiohead]

Once again it is very hard to justify something that was compliant just 3-4 years ago now being deemed potentially dangerous.
I C3 domestic lighting circuits without additional protection but always include a written recommendation that RCD protection be provided in the summary.
[automerge]1593721370[/automerge]

We wouldn't fit things with out an rcd today would we.
My opinion right or wrong is it could be potentially dangerous

I would and indeed do where an RCD is not required. Remember RCD's are a relatively recent requirement in the history of electrical installations ( and were purely used on TT when I started out)...and I dont recall any more reported deaths then than now, although I would admit thats only my recollection.

 

[littlespark]

C3. Improvement recommended.
You make the customer aware and they take an informed choice to undergo the improvements.
Mister landlord had a board change a couple years ago.... a nice plastic one with RCD's in the sockets, but not the lights... You going to tell him he suddenly needs a metal board now?

 

[ChrisElectrical88]

C3 all day long.
Nothing wrong with a baton lamp holder in a bathroom either out of Zones?

 

[Bradbury.john]

Firstly sorry if this has been asked before. Carrying out alot of EICRs because of the new rental laws. Keep coming across boards with just one RCD. Lighting circuits not protected normally I issue a C2 for this and had no problems but one landlord who thinks he knows everything has queried my decision today What would you guys give it C2 or C3

C2 mate your the qualified electrician here not the landlord ?

 

[Zerax]

Think I'm just going to stick to my guns on this one. If they dont like my comments they can go else where.

I assume you mean that he can employ a different electrician who's read the Regs properly ? And of course refund him anything that you've charged ?

 

[Baddegg]

C2 mate your the qualified electrician here not the landlord ?

So 19 months ago it was perfectly safe and now it has the potential to become a real and immediate danger?......yet nothing has been altered..

 

[westward10]

Firstly sorry if this has been asked before. Carrying out alot of EICRs because of the new rental laws. Keep coming across boards with just one RCD. Lighting circuits not protected normally I issue a C2 for this and had no problems but one landlord who thinks he knows everything has queried my decision today What would you guys give it C2 or C3

Aside from asking an internet forum and the pointless opinion of Stroma how will you justify it requiring urgent attention.

 

[ipf]

So 19 months ago it was perfectly safe and now it has the potential to become a real and immediate danger?......yet nothing has been altered..

It's a C3 now, the same as it has been for the last decade or so, Egg.

 

[Baddegg]

It's a C3 now, the same as it has been for the last decade or so, Egg.

That’s what I was trying to say in a convoluted way mate ?

 

[Fitzy]

Firstly sorry if this has been asked before. Carrying out alot of EICRs because of the new rental laws. Keep coming across boards with just one RCD. Lighting circuits not protected normally I issue a C2 for this and had no problems but one landlord who thinks he knows everything has queried my decision today What would you guys give it C2 or C3

So, you post a question on a forum, asking for other electricians opinions on whether they would give a C2 or C3, then when they say that they’ll give it a C3, you get the hump with them! So you’ll take the opinion of someone over the phone, who is most likely reading from a script and might not have much experience, but not from experienced time served electricians with decades of experience???

 

[dodger421]

It’s given a C3 in Best Practice Guide 4 by Electrical Safety First. A resource which is freely available with a quick Google search and may well be where your customer is getting his information from.

NAPIT (the parent company of Stroma I believe), also give it a C3 for 3 different situations in Codebreakers (everyone’s favourite guide...).



Now that’s not to say there aren’t situations where a C2, or even a C1, would be warranted, but that should be backed up by the inspection observations and the test results. For lighting circuits I would hazard a guess they’d be unlikely to be resolved just by fitting an RCD or RCBO (like your non-IP rated light in a zone example; fitting an RCD/RCBO doesn’t remove the danger or reduce it to an ALARP level, the fitting should be replaced with one suitable for the conditions).

You shouldn’t be surprised to be challenged to justify your reasoning when you state that you’ll always issue a C2 for something that the Regulations, published Best Practice Guides and the judgement of most other electricians with at least the same knowledge, skills and competence as you deem to be a C3.

 

[pc1966]

To me a lack of RCD protection (not fitted or not working) would only be serious issue for special cases:

• C1 probably for a TT system incomer as then you are dependent on it for clearing most faults.
• C2 for outdoor (or bathroom) sockets where accidental cable damage or very wet hands are a risk and (last I looked) we still see a few folk killed every year from such accidents.
• C2 for no RCD and no supplementary bonding for bathroom/kitchen sort of thing. But that would be a non-compliant installation for the last couple of editions of the regulations as well.

Open to discussion and corrections from folk here!

 

[Ian1981]

To me a lack of RCD protection (not fitted or not working) would only be serious issue for special cases:

• C1 probably for a TT system incomer as then you are dependent on it for clearing most faults.
• C2 for outdoor (or bathroom) sockets where accidental cable damage or very wet hands are a risk and (last I looked) we still see a few folk killed every year from such accidents.
• C2 for no RCD and no supplementary bonding for bathroom/kitchen sort of thing. But that would be a non-compliant installation for the last couple of editions of the regulations as well.

Open to discussion and corrections from folk here!

Agree except for the C1
If you have inadequate fault protection then it would be a C2 as it’s only potentially dangerous if there is ever a fault.
C1 would indicate that immediate danger is present and it should be removed if possible and the client informed immediately, such as exposed conductive parts and there is immediate danger of electric shock.

 

[pc1966]

Agree except for the C1
If you have inadequate fault protection then it would be a C2 as it’s only potentially dangerous if there is ever a fault.
C1 would indicate that immediate danger is present and it should be removed if possible and the client informed immediately

Yes, giving it C1 would be a bit controversial and is not whan the best-practice guide says. But to me its a bit like reversed polarity: it is not going to give you a shock or cause any obvious problem until there is a fault, and then you get no protection.

Now it might not be as bad as the fire-starting consequences of a "neutral" to earth fault with reversed L&N in a TN system when you have no meaningful OCPD, but it is still a pretty dire position to be in.

 

[Ian1981]

Yes, giving it C1 would be a bit controversial and is not whan the best-practice guide says. But to me its a bit like reversed polarity: it is not going to give you a shock or cause any obvious problem until there is a fault, and then you get no protection.

Now it might not be as bad as the fire-starting consequences of a "neutral" to earth fault with reversed L&N in a TN system when you have no meaningful OCPD, but it is still a pretty dire position to be in.

I can’t agree there that it’s ever a C1 no.
you would have to then in my mind C1 every circuit that has its Zs exceeded and does not meet the relevant disconnection times.
It would only be immediately dangerous if there’s a fault, so the potential is there for danger so a C2

 

[pc1966]

I can’t agree there that it’s ever a C1 no.
you would have to then in my mind C1 every circuit that has its Zs exceeded and does not meet the relevant disconnection times.
It would only be immediately dangerous if there’s a fault.

Yes, I guess that is the correct position to take.

 

[Baddegg]

@Daveh36 you say that’s what Stroma tild you before you changed? What scheme have you changed to and what is they view/opinion?

 

[magnoliafan89]

This has to be a wind up surely???