PIR 16th Vs 17th please clarify

[spark1]

I've not herd that a code 2 is a fail if your niceic registered. I don't think that right.... Its a very grey area that i think needs to be addressed....
obviously a lot is down to the testers discresion but if I have very few codes 3 & 4's and one code 2, I tend to pass this.... As for No RCD being a code 1 thats not right as its not causing an immediate threat to danger its code 2 max.... and if this was my only code 2 I would pass it..

Pre :bs 7671 2008 you would have been correct. If you take a look at Electricity safety Councils -The Best Practice Guide for Periodic Inspection Reporting Codes on Websites such as The Electrical Safety Council Or the NICEIC you will find it is expressed that it would not be reasonable to assess an installation as "satisfactory" if any Code 1 OR code 2 was applied .



spark1

 

[WB Scott]

On my Periodics I tend to class No RCD protection on ground floor sockets as a class 1 and insist to the client that sufficient protection is added and Class any other socket outlets as a class 4, as with buried cables and NON RCD protection in bathroom. Also we have just had our NIC inspection at work and the inspector advised that NON RCD protection on shower circuits be a class 2 not 4, which has been mentioned already in now a failure/un-ssatisfactory

 

[ron55]

On my Periodics I tend to class No RCD protection on ground floor sockets as a class 1 and insist to the client that sufficient protection is added and Class any other socket outlets as a class 4, as with buried cables and NON RCD protection in bathroom. Also we have just had our NIC inspection at work and the inspector advised that NON RCD protection on shower circuits be a class 2 not 4, which has been mentioned already in now a failure/un-ssatisfactory

The thing is you have been commissioned to do a report. You can't insist that clients implement your recomendations. You can stress the point until you are blue in the face but ultimately the decision is theirs to make.

Maybe it's not a satisfactory situation but that's how it is.

Cheers, Ron

 

[Des 56]

Code 2 requires improvement

The nic and esc (which are basically the same outfit) says a code 2 is a fail ?

I could understand if there were quite a few code 2 s, then your decision may be unsatisfactory

If the advise was followed then hardly an handful of installations in the whole of electric land would pass

Playing with both the extreems of the need for safety here I believe
It seems to be a peculiar stance when the same organisation supports and encourages the use of visual inspections which are being used as substitutes for a proper pir
Feet in both camps by the look of things

 

[electro]

Hi

very good post,
Sorry guys I'm all for visual inspections, you will find more code 1's with a visual inspections than you would with a tester. when PIR's are carried out most people leave out the IR when MCB's are present (not everyone). I not seen many satisfactory PIRs is that sparkys covering thier backside or are the installation not satisfactory???

Regards

 

[WB Scott]

The thing is you have been commissioned to do a report. You can't insist that clients implement your recomendations. You can stress the point until you are blue in the face but ultimately the decision is theirs to make.

Maybe it's not a satisfactory situation but that's how it is.

Cheers, Ron

Most of our PIR's are done for Housing associations, therfor a pass is a must for them. We carry out all failure work after the PIR is done, should have mentioned this. Of coures its a slightly different situatin for private clients.

 

[Tapouchoke]

Pre :bs 7671 2008 you would have been correct. If you take a look at Electricity safety Councils -The Best Practice Guide for Periodic Inspection Reporting Codes on Websites such as The Electrical Safety Council Or the NICEIC you will find it is expressed that it would not be reasonable to assess an installation as "satisfactory" if any Code 1 OR code 2 was applied .



spark1

HEAR HEAR!

 

[professional]

If there are any code 1's on an installation, then its generally an instant unsatisfactory and the place shut down and locked off.

Code 2 would be a maximum for non RCD socket outlets IMO.

This would mean that you could be prosecuted - you have no legal power to turn off an unsafe installation!

Where on earth do people get the idea that all existing installations have to comply with the 17th or they fail a PIR? - total, utter rubbish.


Anyone carrying out a PIR should know far better or they should leave well alone.

 

[Spudnik]

Sorry i didnt word that correctly, however, we both know that its highly unlikely that anyone would get taken to court over isolating part of an installation that is unsafe.

So, let me put it another way, 'should be isolated and made safe'.

You would probably end up in court faster if you left any dangerous parts of an installation energised and someone ended up in hospital due to contact with live parts.

 

[professional]

That`s the problem - we have NO legal right to isolate but can be prosecuted for endangering someone.........