Discuss PIR Miscoding - how to remedy in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:   American Electrical Advice Forum

Reaction score
89
Following on from the thread about "PIR Code 1s and am I being scammed", where the requester of the PIR believes that a fault has been coded incorrectly, what can be done about it?

It is reasonable to discuss with the electrician and ask for the report to be re-issued?

If the electrican won't agree to re-issue the report because they disagree with any assertion that the coding is incorrect, would it be worth taking this up with their registration body?

Would it just be simpler to gather and retain the evidence that the fault is mis-coded, e.g. ESC Best Practice Guide and Electrican Forum comments?

BTW I have a PIR for my rental property that lists the non-marking of the switched conductors (on lighting circuits) as a Code 2 whereas the ESC Best Practice Guide suggests this is a Code 4. I'm not proposing to fix this.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
There is a, minor, contractual issue here. The property owner hasn't directly employed the electrician so has no contract with him. Any dealings would have to be through the estate agent.

Having said that there are at least two possible courses to take: a complaint to his registration body (assuming he has one, which I doubt) or a call to trading standards.
 
Non marking of switched conductors is definitely a code 4 and decision to remedy of such a "fault" is down the home owner.

Suggest you write to the Electrician, point out your reference document being the Best Practice Guide and see what they say. It could simply be an oversight on his/her part.
 
The problem with any system that relies on someones interpretation is, that get 10 people to do the same job and more as like, not 2 reports will be the same.

If I did a PIR and coded an installation with a 1 or 2 I'd hope that I was sufficiently competent enough to explain/argue to the client why I did this. Of course we all make mistakes, and after having a chat with the customer you may feel you made one, but to be honest it would have to be something glaring for someone, especially if in this case, as they are an house owner of no electrical background, to persuade me differently.

As for what options the customer has if he feels the report is onerous, he can commission a new report from another electrician.
 
If the electrician is registered with a scheme for conducting PIRs, you could then perhaps contact their scheme provider and make a complaint.
However you don't have to be registered to conduct PIRs, and even if they're registered for Part P installation work, they still don't require to be registered to conduct PIRs.
 
I agree that codes are a matter of opinion and represent a 'mini risk assessment' but there are good guidlines available on what constitutes an 'immediate danger' or a simple non compliance due to a change in BS7671 that does not constitute a safety risk.

Imagine being told that your car failed it's MOT because there was a tear in the seat or it didn't have ABS?

The PIR is an immediate indication of competence from the descriptions of defects to the codes allocated and I really wish that we could implement some sort of system to ensure competency BEFORE an individual calls his/herself an inspector.
 
a simple non compliance due to a change in BS7671 that does not constitute a safety risk.

The problem is that it's all a matter of opinion. If, for example, switch lines aren't correctly identified this clearly does not comply with the Regulations. The question is why do they need to be done, and invariably the answer is for safety reasons. Therefore it raises doubt as to whether it is a category 4 non-compliance or category 2 non-compliance depending on the judgement of the Inspector.

That's the problem with the category 4 non-compliances - how do you declare that something which does not comply with a standard based on electrical safety is not unsafe? Just playing devil's advocate here - not saying that I would never attribute a category "4".
 
Makes you wonder what's going to happen when there is no CODE 4?? Will this encourage the wide boys to issue even more code 1s and 2s, ...Probably is my guess!! ...lol!!
 
Makes you wonder what's going to happen when there is no CODE 4?? Will this encourage the wide boys to issue even more code 1s and 2s, ...Probably is my guess!! ...lol!!

We now will have the new code 3 "Improvement Recommended" just when we were getting the hang of it, or not as some cases seem to show
 
I consider my self well rounded and competant Thast sais there are still times when everyone comes across something n thinks "thats NOT right !!!" but what is wrong with it how? how to word it on cert ? then What code would I attribute to said wront doing?
I have recently done a Big commercial PIR surface everything looked great till I opened a couple of doors and INSPECTED things F.C.U.s all over the place no longer in use with flexes cut at hole fuses out BUT if there were reverse polarity the neutral COULD become live Code 1 ( no as its in a duct with limited access and trained persons only who have been informed of the situation AND the its IFS ) so its code 2 PersonalyI try( not always practical to repair eg RCD no trip on obsolete db) all code 1s before leaving site OR at least make them safe
 
The problem is that it's all a matter of opinion. If, for example, switch lines aren't correctly identified this clearly does not comply with the Regulations. The question is why do they need to be done, and invariably the answer is for safety reasons. Therefore it raises doubt as to whether it is a category 4 non-compliance or category 2 non-compliance depending on the judgement of the Inspector.

That's the problem with the category 4 non-compliances - how do you declare that something which does not comply with a standard based on electrical safety is not unsafe? Just playing devil's advocate here - not saying that I would never attribute a category "4".

Devil's advocate is good, keeps the discussion going but if you take the unmarked switch lines, look at what needs to happen before a danger is created, as in opening enclosures, removing accessories etc. this work should be carried out with a level of competence and suitable precautions.
 
I was watching a video on LearningLounge, whereby Tony Cable said that the reason some items that were previously catagorised as code 2 were now a code 4, was because if you have given any code 2s you need to mark the overall report as unsatisfactory, and that this would not have been deemed reasonable with some of the old code 2s. They were therefore changed to code 4s.

But now some are saying that you can have code 2s and still give an overall mark of satisfactory.

I realise that a lot of people on here dispise the NIC and all associated with it, so don't kill the messenger. I just think, as I said in a post on the PIR thread, that it certainly does not help those of us that are still learning when one half of the industry is doing/reccomending one thing, and the guys at the coal face are doing another.

The problem lies in the situation whereby you go against so called industry guidelines and then something goes wrong..

I'm not sure I would like to say to a judge, I ignored what the ESC said and went with some advice from a forum.

Cheers
 
I was watching a video on LearningLounge, whereby Tony Cable said that the reason some items that were previously catagorised as code 2 were now a code 4, was because if you have given any code 2s you need to mark the overall report as unsatisfactory, and that this would not have been deemed reasonable with some of the old code 2s. They were therefore changed to code 4s.

But now some are saying that you can have code 2s and still give an overall mark of satisfactory.

I realise that a lot of people on here dispise the NIC and all associated with it, so don't kill the messenger. I just think, as I said in a post on the PIR thread, that it certainly does not help those of us that are still learning when one half of the industry is doing/reccomending one thing, and the guys at the coal face are doing another.

The problem lies in the situation whereby you go against so called industry guidelines and then something goes wrong..

I'm not sure I would like to say to a judge, I ignored what the ESC said and went with some advice from a forum.

Cheers

You are absolutely spot on, that guide should be in every electrician's vehicle, look at the organisations that contributed and associated themselves with the guide, literally all of our industry bodies....
 
The ECS Guide seems to make it clear to me (at least) that Code 2 are for issues of potential safety to users of the electrical system (or the occupiers of the property).

Issues of safety for subsequent electrical contractors & householders working on the electrical installation (e.g. labeling of switched conductions, labels confirming the use of old & new wiring colours, etc.) do not seem to be accorded Code 2 status in the ESC Guide - the Guide is clear that any Code 2s make the installation unsatisfactory.
 

Reply to PIR Miscoding - how to remedy in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by Untold Media. Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock