Which qualification for domestic inspection and testing?

[DNS1]

Sorry for this basic question guys, but I'm having a hard time getting to grips with which C&G is required to qualify me for domestic inspection and testing of old installations. 2392? 2391?

A friend of mine is having trouble with nuisance RCD tripping in her 1900s terrace, so I said I'd do a sort of mock inspection, just for practice with the new MFT. They know I'm not yet qualified so can't do repair work. Just got me wondering which C&G I need to do this properly in future, the college I'm using offers 2392 before going on to the 2391 so I wondered what the difference is.

Cheers

 

[spark 68]

Hi,

The 2392 is a watered down easier version of the 2391, it is a practical (single phase) and multi-choice exam and is only for testing and initial verification (it does not include the PIR/EICR sections)

If all you are doing is domestic (new) installing, then the 2392 may be for you.

This exam is of no use outside of domestic (self employed), and is never asked for (or recognised) in industry, it is of no use for recruitment purposes.

A lot of DI's do this exam, and some use it as a stepping stone for the 2391, as it is a sort of halfway exam, but if you are using it as a stepping stone you are paying twice.

I myself have not done this exam (I did the 2391), so if Iam wrong on any points Iam sure I will soon be corrected!

 

[DNS1]

Thanks for that.

I was planning on using it as a stepping stone myself, but if I can go straight for the 2391 without it then I will

Cheers.

 

[pencilpusher]

Spark 68 has it spot on. 2392 is a stepping stone to get experience before tackling the much harder 2391. EICR's do not need 2391 if you are doing doemstic reports for private home owners. If you want to do landlord, council ones they will want scheme accreditation (Elecsa etc) and for that you will need 2391.

2392 is a good stepping stone. Make no bones about it 2391 is not to be taken lightly.

The bottom line is you could end up in court if something goes pear shaped. You don't need 2391 but it won't half help your case to show you are more qualified and experienced!

 

[tony mc]

I done them both and to be honest I wish I had gone straight for the 2391.



Did you locate the RCD fault??

 

[pencilpusher]

People do tony but guys I know who failed the 2391 wished they had done the 2392 first! Horses for courses.

 

[tony mc]

I took the 2392 because of the amount of people who were failing the 2391.

So I suppose in a way it did help me but once at college for the 2391 it became apparent that you needed to do far more work and lots of home study. (Mind you that might just be me as im not the brightest in the class)

 

[brucelee]

Hi the 2391 is hard and will require a lot of personal study if you have little or no experience then its hard but still possible

If you dont think you can learn all required then go down the 2392 first but as others have said its a stepping stone and not really asked for in the industry

the 2391-10 is the one to get or the newer 2394 and 2395 which are replacing it then the next step the 2391-20 if you want to go into design again a difficult but not impossible to get qualification but that to is about to end and a new 2396 is taking over so they have split 2 quals into 3 to get you to pay aother £500+ quid Its all a scam with C&G quals

Good luck get the GN3 , memorandum of guidance on elecy at work regs
guidance note GS38, OSG and learn part 6 and 7 the regs do loads of sample papers also get the exam success book as this will show you how C&G want the questions answered terminology is KEY
cristopher kitchers guide to inspection and testing is a good book
saddens
basically learn everything you can on the subject and you will pass

 

[DNS1]

Cheers for the advice.

It will be a while before I'm going for the quals, but I'll definitely be bearing all this in mind. When do the 2394 and 95 come in? I'd never heard of them to be honest.

 

[tuckerkop81]

Im sitting the 2395 now, and have been told that the 2394 is exactly the same, apart from a few hours work. Thankfully my tutour has kindly agreed to give us the extra tuition required for the 2394 and just pay for the exam fees. As said above, it is not a walk in the park, but with the right attitude and preperation you should be fine. Pass or fail i have learnt a hell of a lot from the course. I think its disgusting that cng have split the 2391, money making written all over it.

Tom

 

[brucelee]

go on C&G website it tells you of the changes

all C&G electrical quals are changing to a QCF framework
2330 ends july
2356 nvq lv3 ends july
and being rplaced by 2357
this should have happened last march 31st 2011 but after intitailly telling me it was then the last day of registration i enrolled and day after got a aplogy via email from C&G saying they were now extending as the new 2357 wasnt ready and the industry preferred to stick with 2330 and 2356 until glitches etc sorted with the 2357
2391-10 and 20 are ending sometime soon cant remember off hand but replacing with 3
but the 2394 is initial verification
2395 EICR (PIR)
so were it would have cost you £500 roughly each for the 2391 series add another £500 for the newer quals
2396 design and verification which will now be a LV4 were the 2391-20 was a lv3
2382-10 has been replaced by 2382-12
the C&G webby tells you all this just type in the search bar for 2391 and all info relating to qual comes up

 

[pencilpusher]

But can't people go straight for the 2395 and miss out the 2394? As before with 2392 and missing that out and going staright to 2391, it saves approx £500??

 

[tuckerkop81]

well the 2394 and 2395 are different quals.
2394 focus' on new install
2395 condition reports.

 

[pencilpusher]

well the 2394 and 2395 are different quals.
2394 focus' on new install
2395 condition reports.

As is 2392 and 2391 now! That's my point, surely one or the other or both can be taken?

 

[tuckerkop81]

No its not like that. My understanding is the 2392 was an introduction to the 2391, but wasnt really recognised much throughout the industry.
The 2394 and the 2395 put together is the 2391. If i only done the 2395, i beleive i would only be able to sign off condition reports ( pirs ), and not new installs, and the same vise versa. Dont quote me on this but it is my understanding of it.

Hope it helps.

 

[GLENNSPARK]

I done them both and to be honest I wish I had gone straight for the 2391.



Did you locate the RCD fault??

same here tony.....in hindsight maybe i should have gone straight for the 2391..but whats done is done......

 

[GLENNSPARK]

the thing is n all....is you DONT need to be a holder of the C&G 2391 to carry out EICRs.....and you certainly dont need to be on a scheme (regardless of what the scheme providers would have you believe).....

 

[tuckerkop81]

So for me to go into a property and sign off the electrical installation, i WOULDNT need the 2394 or 2395???? This is confusing me.... ( iknow, not hard!! )

 

[GLENNSPARK]

its about proving competency in this game mate......dont get me wrong....if it all went arse up and you found yourself in court over something overlooked on an EICR that consequently fired...then a good way of proving competency is to hold relevent quals/certs....such as the 2391.....and i think thats been mentioned already......but you dont need to be a scheme member to carry out periodics.....any irregularities/non conformances found (1s and 2s)......you may need to be a scheme member to rectify those faults....but there again..they may not be classes as notifyable as well...lol...even if they were notifyable....you may just opt to notify the LABC yourself who may want to see that you hold relevent certs.....such as the 2391.....

 

[GLENNSPARK]

but dont forget as well that an EICR is only good until you hand over the signed EICR form.....that is to say that the installation was good for continued service as you saw it at the time the periodic was carried out......