line-neutral insulation resistance test

[ban-all-sheds]

All this "if the wiring were recent we wouldn't insure but because there's an old certificate which hasn't 'expired' we just have to accept it" doesn't sound like any insurance company I've ever heard of.

And as for beating down the price, by all means give it a go, but chances are the answer will be "the price is for the property in the condition it is".

 

[Risteard]

No it isn't!

Yes it most certainly is.

 

[securespark]

We might just be outside the panto season, but here goes anyway: "Oh no it isn't!"

Especially where no CPC is present.

 

[JohnW2]

We might just be outside the panto season, but here goes anyway: "Oh no it isn't!"
Especially where no CPC is present.

Indeed. As I have said, in the presence of a CPC (particularly when arranged as in T+E), it's probably not really necessary, not the least because an L-N fault/'leak' that does not also involve the CPC is almost impossible. However, when there is no CPC, not only is it possible that there can be an L-L fault/'leak' which involves nothing else (there is nothing else!), but, given that it's the only IR test which can be done, it would seem to make sense (if practicable) to do it.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Risteard]

With respect securespark, I would have to suggest that anyone who believes that insulation testing between live conductors is usual during periodic inspection and testing has very little (if any) experience of periodic inspection and testing.

How would that work in a factory or shopping centre for example?

 

[Iggifer]

The discussion isn't related to a shopping centre or factory. It's related to a domestic property where there is (presumed to be) no cpc on the lighting circuit.

That does change things a little, because with no cpc and assuming you're not carrying out L-N IR that means the only other test you can carry out is polarity. Hardly a very comprehensive condition report.

In a house, it's not often impractical to remove a few lamps (yes 12v/LED integrated downlighters can be a pain).

I'm not saying it's common, because it's accepted, and if I'm not mistaken it's even noted in GN3 it's acceptable not to do L-N on an EICR, but it is done when needed - which is what securespark has just said

 

[JohnW2]

How would that work in a factory or shopping centre for example?

We are (or, at least, I thought we were - and I certainly was!) talking specifically about a lighting circuit with no CPC. How common would that be in a factory or shopping centre?

Kind Regards, John

 

[mwatsonxx]

With respect securespark, I would have to suggest that anyone who believes that insulation testing between live conductors is usual during periodic inspection and testing has very little (if any) experience of periodic inspection and testing.

How would that work in a factory or shopping centre for example?

I agree, but I do know of one major underwear retailer that completely tests every circuit every 3 years.