Poor install EICR 12 year old hotel

[conrad]

Agree with you there thats always a code 3 for me

I put C3 and i believe it is a C3 in the napit book.

 

[Flanders]

Again reading the napit codebreakers book it states holes not made goot as to reduce the spread of fire are C2. I would rather C2 and have a valid reference such as a book than to C3 it and argue against it.

There is no right or wrong answer its down to the persifics of each situation and you make a judgment call on it I will stick with my code 3 but would not judge someone else if they where to code 2 it .

 

[conrad]

The idea is tho that you are now outside the equipotential bonding using outdoor equipment so I’d agree that if socket outlets that are not likely to be used outdoors and this is carefull considered by the inspector perhaps in conjunction with the client, then I agree a C3 at worst for no rcd protection to sockets.
You are coding against additional protection to the user and not the equipment plugged into it
For a specific socket used as in the op for a fridge it can’t possibly be a C2 code

The sockets are not labelled, no risk assessment and they are not being used for the fridges in alot of the rooms. The client also said that he often finds the fridges have been unplugged as there isnt enough sockets in the rooms

 

[conrad]

If the swa is glanded at the supply end and the armour is at least connected to earth, I can’t see how it can possibly be a C2 unless there is signs of mechanical stresses on the cable at the load end?

Cant see above the DB to see if its cleated well and they all seam to be coming in at angles. Its all together rough so ill stick with C2. If i was to share some of the communal areas you would agree. The rooms are good compared.

 

[conrad]

There is no right or wrong answer its down to the persifics of each situation and you make a judgment call on it I will stick with my code 3 but would not judge someone else if they where to code 2 it .

I think youd agree that it is rough and would prefer to see the DB installed properly and stick an rcd socket on the socket not protected as again the client has stated people unplug the fridge and use it for all sorts.

Does it give a reason for this? , also is a hotel classed as commercial I thought they would be classed as simply a hotel

Yes its classed as commercial premesis.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Regarding the socket, it's a code 3 for me, however in these circumstances I always add an advisory note that the provision of RCD protection is strongly recommended. Given that under a very recent edition of Bs7671 the provision of a socket outlet for a specific item of equipment was permitted without RCD protection it is very hard to justify a 'potentially dangerous' code.

 

[conrad]

Regarding the socket, it's a code 3 for me, however in these circumstances I always add an advisory note that the provision of RCD protection is strongly recommended. Given that under a very recent edition of Bs7671 the provision of a socket outlet for a specific item of equipment was permitted without RCD protection it is very hard to justify a 'potentially dangerous' code.

But the reg 411.3.3 specifically says risk assessment required and even if ther was its clearly not being used for a specific item of equipment. I still think C2 when the public are involved especially in terms of liability.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

It’s the 18th now.
All socket-outlets must have RCD protection.
Risk Assessments are out the window.

 

[dmxtothemax]

We do not know the conditions under which this instal was done,
It seems to be mostly what people might call sloopy work,
Or not " Best practice " but it is not really dangerous,
it's just not best practice.
Many electrical instals are done to a lower standard,
yet last for decades with no problems.
everything can always be done better

 

[Ian1981]

It’s the 18th now.
All socket-outlets must have RCD protection.
Risk Assessments are out the window.

Risk assessments are not out of the window on non domestic installations 411.3.3 an exception to (i) is permitted where other than an installation in a dwelling, a documented risk assessment determines that rcd protection is not necessary

 

[Ian1981]

But the reg 411.3.3 specifically says risk assessment required and even if ther was its clearly not being used for a specific item of equipment. I still think C2 when the public are involved especially in terms of liability.

The regulations do not differ on who is using the sockets so you can’t make that argument
The fact that a documented risk assessment can be used on non domestic installations gives, if anything gives a bit of a relaxation on 411.3.3

 

[conrad]

The regulations do not differ on who is using the sockets so you can’t make that argument
The fact that a documented risk assessment can be used on non domestic installations gives, if anything gives a bit of a relaxation on 411.3.3

 

[Ian1981]

But the reg 411.3.3 specifically says risk assessment required and even if ther was its clearly not being used for a specific item of equipment. I still think C2 when the public are involved especially in terms of liability.

The regulations do not differ on who is using the sockets so you can’t make that argument

View attachment 46928

they do and can not speak for the whole industry.
I can show you an NICEIC similar list which is available to the online customers which gives a C3.
You see the problem

 

[conrad]

View attachment 46928

I disagree on the relaxation. Its always been for specific use items and in this instance the socket has extention leads plugged in etc. The hotel would be liable in my eyes. You can make the argument as in my eyes the reg does differ from the users when it specifically says risk assessment to be performed in non dwelling etc...

 

[conrad]

I walked into this in a cleaners cupboard in the hotel kitchen. Apparently been like this since it opened. I think you will take your sloppy workmanship statement back. The lid was wide open, i havnt opened it.

 

[Rpa07]

I’ll imagine that someone’s been using that as a locker! They probably keep the 5mm retaining bolts on a keychain!
Nice to see proper blanks being used!

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Risk assessments are not out of the window on non domestic installations 411.3.3 an exception to (i) is permitted where other than an installation in a dwelling, a documented risk assessment determines that rcd protection is not necessary

I stand corrected, thought that was being dropped.
At least they’ve took on board that the RA must determine “RCD protection is not necessary”.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I note that the Hotel is 12 years old, which means it was designed to the 16th edition.
As such RCD protection was not required unless it could reasonably be assumed that the sockets would be used to provide power to portable equipment used outdoors.
If the inspection is being conducted in accordance with BS7671, then the lack of RCD protection would be a code C3 (complied at the time of design/construction).

 

[Silly Sausage]

Another thought, there should be two other Inspection Reports somewhere (5 yearly for hotels?), which would be worth viewing.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

This current EICR, is probably meant to be the 2nd.
Though is most likely the 1st.