Periodic codes and your opinion

[Markc]

Its been one of those questions that I have had numerous answers for.
Periodic codes for defects and how to grade them has been one question that has caused more than one argument over a cuppa. I grade things as I find them and not always agree with the Electrical safety guide or NICEIC. On my annual inspection a few years ago Mr NIC disagreed with my code selection for a pendant light in a breakfast room that was wired in twin flex under the floor of the bedroom. Plastic pendant and no CPC. I know the pendant is class II but the property was a rental and the fitting could be changed for a class I by a new occupant. I used a code 2 (requires improvement) We were also instructed to conduct the minor remedial works at the same time so was rewired to T&E at the same time so not left as was but was identified on our periodic report as above. My inspector disagreed with a code 2 saying he thought it harsh and a code 4 (non compliant with BS7671) would be more appropriate but didn’t have much to say regarding the lack of CPC in the supply cable (Or flex for that matter). My argument was that a code 4 can be left as it is. A none compliant item rather than a defect.
I often disagree with codes I see listed in trade mags, literature and other reports I see and believe that a code should be issued from experience, knowledge and use of the property.

What’s your opinion?

 

[bugsy]

Your both right

 

[eddielarge]

im glad u cleared that up bugsy lol..

I personally would go code 2, better to condem on a report and get proven wrong , than to give it a code 4 and let it come back and bite u on the ****

 

[Markc]

That’s a cope out if ever there was one Bugsy..............

 

[Notsosmart]

A code 4 in this situation will not come back to bite you on the **** though.

I would say that a PIR is a report on the installation on how you find it, it is not for you to predict what changes will be made in the future, where do you draw the line? In saying this however you are quite right in stating that experience & knowledge of the property (& use of it) does play q big part in how you aproach the Inspection & I would agree that a code 2 would be appropriate, as the 2 core flex was under floor boards.
As you then rectified the wiring I would say that the NIC inspector just had nothing better to say (as usual) when they try their best to find fault and have nothing to go on.

 

[Markc]

As you then rectified the wiring I would say that the NIC inspector just had nothing better to say (as usual) when they try their best to find fault and have nothing to go on.[/QUOTE]

Very true there that man! And that being my point also. There is in my opinion no level playing field regarding codes and to be honest I think we (Electricians) are our own worst enemy.

 

[Guest123]

At the end of the day......everyone has a different take on the regs and PIR codes alike. Can there be a wrong and a right when it comes to coding........I believe not, as it's down to one person making an informed decision at that time. As has been said without the info the chap carrying out the periodic has, how can we say it's right or wrong.

In this case with the info you have given us.....I'd be inclined to agree with you. But if I was there doing the report myself who's to say.

 

[andekoch]

difficult one. hade one the other day where an client asked me to comment on why the PIR he had done by someone else had a code 2 against the cliped direct wiring in his garage. He asked me what I would have classed it as and did it really need to be pulled out and put into conduit.

My answer was; the code is the opinion of the tester based on what he saw at the time and what he has experienced in his career so far. So as bugsy said 'both are right'.

personally since he only used the garage for storage and not much at that as well (no tools or workbench so not much chance of damaging the cables) plus the cables were well out of the way I would probably have not have noted it at all.

the inspection is only applicable to what is there at the time of the inspection so no cpc and a class II light is ok so probably a class 4 if it was me (and there is nothing else to make it more than a class 4 ie there is RCD protection on the cables). a class 2 is thinking along the lines of what if and also covers for cable damage protection

 

[oldtimer]

wiring a pendant under the floor with a 2-core flex to me is a no no for me and as for the inspector what was he thinking. Let me explain I was always taught that when you wired a "point" ie socket or light it had to be fit for use so a light point had to have an earth no matter if a pendant was used or not because there was a potential that someone in thefuture would remove the pendant and fit a metal light fitting as for the power you always wired a socket/spur in 2.5mm even if it was a fixed appliance that drew a couple of amps because again if this was removed in the future and replaced with a say a wall mounted wall heater the circuit could cope with the load

Now if you think this does not make sense look what has happened with regards to showers years ago the were wired in 6mm because they were al rated the same ie 7kw until the more powerfull 8-9kw came on the scene. So when someones old shower packed in they treated themselves to a larger unit not realising that when they fitted it the fuse popped so they just upgraded the fuse wire and not understanding that the 6mm was getting a bit warm.

 

[stretchyboy]

I agree with the 'both right' but would probably have code 4'd it myself and added a statement about if the light fitting was changed, then it needed replacement. Surely if we work on the theory of, we allow for any future items then we should all be fitting 25mm for a shower as they only seem to be getting bigger, and 200A incoming incase the mains board gets over-loaded????

The NIC have guidance docs for how to change a mains board in a property that has lighting circuits without earths and how to complete it and the paperwork without breaking the regs........ I was quite amazed to find this, but they seem to be saying that they find it acceptable.

 

[oldtimer]

With regards to the NIC saying it is ok to upgrade a CU and you can ignore the light circuit without an earth well me thinks that is their way of comprimising as long as a RCD CU is getting fitted because it looks like thats the way they want it to go in order to get electrical safety up to spec with europe.

As for shower loads getting bigger I see your point and when I helped my neighbour install a 9.6kw shower with 10mm and a 50 amp circuit breaker I reminded them that as they live in a 1950s house their main fuse
could be 80 amps and on Christmas day with the kitchen going full pelt and hairdryers and showers being used at the same time then they could pop the main fuse. They took my advice on board and then reported back that people they knew did exactly that and had ruined their day.