Ramifications of a worthless EICR

[Teddy Lop]

One of the boxes is necessary for verifying dead continuity readings. But you need to consider whether dead continuity testing is required in an already energised installation. Indeed Guidance Note 3 directly addresses this. You are there to assess the safety of the existing electrical installation, and not to perform a box-filling exercise. It's required for initial verification as the installation shouldn't be energised if it isn't all Earthed. That becomes a moot point once the installation has already been energised, and continuity can then legitimately be demonstrated by other means (i.e. live testing).

I'd say you're making assumptions about what has gone before that undermine the point of even carrying out an EICR. I dunno about you but the universe I occupy, energising the RCD and it staying put is all the verification some fitters will ever do...

R1R2 testing can inform a fair bit more than checking earth continuity by whatever means is easiest.

 

[Risteard]

But doesn’t that mean you’re assuming all earthing is adequate when you arrive when it might not be which is often the case?

No. I make no assumptions about the installation, and will verify that it is Earthed (likely through live testing). But concerning myself with whether the installation was safe to energise in the first place is like slamming the stable door after the horse has bolted.

 

[Teddy Lop]

For anyone stumbling on the thread looking for answers to the actual question posed, I'm informed the limitations without agreement pretty much puts it squarely on the contractor. What happens should he simply fold the limited company who knows.

My enquiries only further reveal what a depressing hitshow this industry/country is. Never mind I'll be leaving y'all to it.