Periodic inspection

[beesley121]

heres the inside of the board as requested. sorry it took some time to upload

 

[trev]

Not the neatest CU I ever saw but they look suspiciously like RCBOs to me. I'm with Sintra on this, the guy should know whether something complies or not and £100 for a new CU is a joke. If he fits a Chint that's him doing the job for £50, plus I was under the impression that on a change of circuit characteristics tests had to be performed.
Be very wary.

 

[GLENNSPARK]

a bit of tidyin up...
that`l see to that...

 

[KAS1]

I think I'd watch out for the spider in there somewhere lol

 

[Octopus]

Not the neatest CU I ever saw but they look suspiciously like RCBOs to me. I'm with Sintra on this, the guy should know whether something complies or not and £100 for a new CU is a joke. If he fits a Chint that's him doing the job for £50, plus I was under the impression that on a change of circuit characteristics tests had to be performed.
Be very wary.

At this price I would wonder what his original testing was like. I allow a full day for a CU change!

And you won't be getting a RCBO board for that price either!

 

[beesley121]

He told me he would just charge me an hours labour to fit the board as I've already paid for the testing

So what's the verdict guys, does this board need changing or not? Providing it has passed all the other checks

 

[oldtimer]

Your analogy of is it like a MOT is correct so modern cars have airbags a seat belts but a garage cannot fail a car because it does not have them as it was built before these came out and the fuseboard is the same and again this should be a lesson to anybody who does EICRs that your job is to ensure the unit meets the regs and that you cannot force anybody to upgrade their fuseboard because of your opinion which matters not a jot in a court of law.

I have mentioned this before where a landlord got a full refund on getting his CU changed because the people who did the EICR said he had to have it for rental sadly this will not be the last post on this . Now my daughter who rents her flat out does have a new fuseboard because she got dad rates and when I am asked from a landlord do I need to change my CU I always reply if it meets the requirements of the regs then no you do not but it would be prudent on safety grounds to change it or to plan to change it in the future. Recently I got a CU change to do from a landlord who asked me that question 2 years ago

 

[Dave 85]

I've always been a bit unsure about this whole EICR thing myself. I've always been aware that it only needs to conform to the regs at the time of install but when I spoke to the elecsa man he recommended I put socket outlets without RCD as a code 1. Now, im not saying this is correct because this logic on, say a 30 year old install, would be conforming to niether the regs at time of install or the current regs (in that hes only requiring RCD on sockets and not all flushed cables) but to the 16th edition.

With regards to the OP....(ive not read whole thread so sorry if im repeating somebody else)
What you say is correct, its not required by law but it protects the landlord if the poo hits the fan. Yes you still have to pay the guy if the result is a fail, no you dont have to use him to do the remedial work.
If the house burns down, all the kids die and you end up getting investigated...if you have an EICR saying its a fail and listing the non conformities and then an installation cert from another contactor describing the rectification of said non conformities.....well...I'd say you're pretty well covered.

 

[GLENNSPARK]

I've always been a bit unsure about this whole EICR thing myself. I've always been aware that it only needs to conform to the regs at the time of install but when I spoke to the elecsa man he recommended I put socket outlets without RCD as a code 1. Now, im not saying this is correct because this logic on, say a 30 year old install, would be conforming to niether the regs at time of install or the current regs (in that hes only requiring RCD on sockets and not all flushed cables) but to the 16th edition.

With regards to the OP....(ive not read whole thread so sorry if im repeating somebody else)
What you say is correct, its not required by law but it protects the landlord if the poo hits the fan. Yes you still have to pay the guy if the result is a fail, no you dont have to use him to do the remedial work.
If the house burns down, all the kids die and you end up getting investigated...if you have an EICR saying its a fail and listing the non conformities and then an installation cert from another contactor describing the rectification of said non conformities.....well...I'd say you're pretty well covered.

well then he was talkin out of his arse....

- - - Updated - - -

go ask him what a 1 is...

 

[odawire]

He told me he would just charge me an hours labour to fit the board as I've already paid for the testing

So what's the verdict guys, does this board need changing or not? Providing it has passed all the other checks

I cannot see why he is suggesting a board change, looks like rcbos protecting the ring circuits, which is the best you can have and when I read £100 for the board change white wine nearly came out of my nose, that is ridiculously cheap, Ird get a second opinion if I were you

 

[oldtimer]

Still think some guys who do EICRs have got traffic warden syndrome where the put their scheme uniform on ie a badge on a polo shirt and the power surges through their bodies. As for the Elesca man do what I do ask him to put it in writing a bit like when I advised a customer to request that BG put in writing that they no longer held spares for his boiler that was 2 years ago and he is still waiting

 

[tony mc]

I've always been a bit unsure about this whole EICR thing myself. I've always been aware that it only needs to conform to the regs at the time of install but when I spoke to the elecsa man he recommended I put socket outlets without RCD as a code 1. Now, im not saying this is correct because this logic on, say a 30 year old install, would be conforming to niether the regs at time of install or the current regs (in that hes only requiring RCD on sockets and not all flushed cables) but to the 16th edition.

With regards to the OP....(ive not read whole thread so sorry if im repeating somebody else)
What you say is correct, its not required by law but it protects the landlord if the poo hits the fan. Yes you still have to pay the guy if the result is a fail, no you dont have to use him to do the remedial work.
If the house burns down, all the kids die and you end up getting investigated...if you have an EICR saying its a fail and listing the non conformities and then an installation cert from another contactor describing the rectification of said non conformities.....well...I'd say you're pretty well covered.

If you do periodics then you will be issuing a lot of danger notices if that's the case. I very much doubt the Tech team at Elecsa would give that sort of advice !

 

[odawire]

I've always been a bit unsure about this whole EICR thing myself. I've always been aware that it only needs to conform to the regs at the time of install but when I spoke to the elecsa man he recommended I put socket outlets without RCD as a code 1. Now, im not saying this is correct because this logic on, say a 30 year old install, would be conforming to niether the regs at time of install or the current regs (in that hes only requiring RCD on sockets and not all flushed cables) but to the 16th edition.

With regards to the OP....(ive not read whole thread so sorry if im repeating somebody else)
What you say is correct, its not required by law but it protects the landlord if the poo hits the fan. Yes you still have to pay the guy if the result is a fail, no you dont have to use him to do the remedial work.
If the house burns down, all the kids die and you end up getting investigated...if you have an EICR saying its a fail and listing the non conformities and then an installation cert from another contactor describing the rectification of said non conformities.....well...I'd say you're pretty well covered.

Sockets that could supply equipment out side should be a C2 not C1

 

[GLENNSPARK]

Sockets that could supply equipment out side should be a C2 not C1

depends on when they were installed....

- - - Updated - - -

look, if its a 16th ed...then sockets to be used outdoors blah blah blah....
if earlier then whats a 2 all about?

 

[odawire]

depends on when they were installed....

- - - Updated - - -

look, if its a 16th ed...then sockets to be used outdoors blah blah blah....
if earlier then whats a 2 all about?

I've had this conversation loads of times on this forum, not gonna argue with you but BPG4 is crystal clear it should be a C2

 

[GLENNSPARK]

I've had this conversation loads of times on this forum, not gonna argue with you but BPG4 is crystal clear it should be a C2

you dont just go round failin stuff...
its a 3....

 

[odawire]

you dont just go round failin stuff...
its a 3....

Right, OK

 

[GLENNSPARK]

you can offer to fit an RCD socket outlet for em....for using outdoor equipment...
theres RCD extention leads n all....
so how the hell can you just glibly award it a 2?

 

[odawire]

you can offer to fit an RCD socket outlet for em....for using outdoor equipment...
theres RCD extention leads n all....
so how the hell can you just glibly award it a 2?

If you fitted a RCD socket outlet it would be ok then wouldn't it

 

[GLENNSPARK]

If you fitted a RCD socket outlet it would be ok then wouldn't it

its OK anyway....you could recommend that an RCD outlet be fitted....
look, theres all this about `well you cant have this` & `thats a fail that there is`...all a load of nonsense....