PIR 16th Vs 17th please clarify

[Mark.W]

This paragraph is a quote from the Practical Guide to Inspection and Testing Book.

"Remember the installation may not comply with the current regulations.
If this is the case then a judgement will have to be made by you, as to
whether the installation is recorded as satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Clearly
an installation which was safe when it was installed does not become unsafe
because the regulations have been updated.
Compliance BS 7671:2008 will require that, in most instances, circuits should
be RCD protected. It will be some considerable time before this will be found
to be the case when carrying out periodic inspections. In most instances this
type of non-compliance would be regarded as a 4 in the observations and
recommendations section of the PIR."

 

[pevvers]

Some of the GUIDANCE is somewhat misleading - the definitions of what constitutes a Code 1 and 2 have been tinkered with to satisfy a hidden agenda.

Personally I use common sense and experience above guidance given by faceless armchair experts.

I agree somewhat in what you say, as I have had issues with some of things that I have read in the NICEIC guide to domestic periodic reporting. But when push comes to shove, and you mark down a recommendation as it is coded in the book, if the poo hits the fan then you will have the backing of the NICEIC (my scheme provider), as I don't see that they can argue with a point that is in their own publication...

No thermostatic cut-out on immersion heaters was one point I did not agree with them giving a code 2, but that's what they state in the above named book. What are you to do?