EICR For Dad's Widow

[securespark]

She is selling the house. Last rewired in the 60's (post '66, I believe, as there are CPCs in the lighting). Has had alterations and additions in almost every decade since, as far as I can tell.

I couldn't do it as I am not up to speed with 18th and am not independent.

Guy came round and spent less than an hour there.

Odd that he has mentioned that the intake and fuse box is partially restricted by the loo. It is next to the loo and the intake is all boxed in with the fuse box above covered with a removable box. Not really restricted by the loo.

Going round in the coming days to check the lighting earth. There is deffo a CPC in the cables and it is connected to others in several places in the circuit I have looked in the past.

Comments?

 

[flameport]

Not as bad as some that have been posted here in the past, but it's certainly not good either.
Presumably it's a wooden fusebox with the plug in MCBs, and the only RCD is one built into the socket outlet for the stairs.

Unidentified circuits should be FI, not C3
8.4 - supplementary bonding would be required if no RCD, so that should not be N/A
Most of the circuits were not tested.
Most of the insulation resistance results are very low, under 1Mohm, which doesn't seem particularly likely unless the wiring is totally ruined.
16A for a lighting circuit isn't a common value for domestic, but isn't a problem with 1.5mm wiring
If the wiring is from the 1960s, it won't be metric sizes.
16mm earth and 10mm bonding isn't what would be expected to be found with a wooden fusebox.
Resistance for the ring conductors circuit 3 are way off.

There are a lot of items incorrectly marked LIM or N/A, which appear to have been used as substitutes for 'couldn't be bothered':
4.8 - not LIM, either the switch can be secured or it cannot.
4.9 - not N/A - all circuit breakers should be tested to confirm disconnection
4.11 a and b - if required, either they exist or they don't.
6.3. - a warning label exists or not, probably should be N/A
7.5 - security of fixing, it's either securely fixed or not.
8.6 - surely the bathroom must have some equipment, a light fitting at least?

 

[Risteard]

I notice one of the ring final circuits has an excessive end-to-end measurement on the neutral (rn) compared to the phase. However this has not been mentioned in the observations, which is odd as there clearly is an issue with the connections here.

 

[winston1]

ONCE AGAIN. You do not need to get an EICR to sell a house. Surveys including EICRs are traditionally commissioned and paid for by the potential buyer. As a buyer I would not trust an EICR offered by the vendor.

 

[ericmark]

I remember doing my C&G 2391, no walking around, we had a board with all the samples on it, and we had to identify faults, can't remember how long we had, think an hour, but hard pushed to complete on time, if we tested a house to same standard it would likely take over a day, so we simply can't justify spending that long, so we have to use our experience to select areas where we are likely to find faults, and the readings alert us to likely faults, so when my meter showed a different impedance at the CU and the socket which was only 40 mm away, there was clearly a fault, same readings with 5 meters OK, but used experience, and I found the resistors in the supply cable put there to simulate a full size house, however if the sockets had been used with a 13 amp load there would have been a fire, so I failed that circuit as being dangerous.

This caused some discussion with lecturer/examiner, but I passed, and so did all the guys who didn't find the resistors. However the The case was brought by Pembrokeshire County Council Trading Standards and heard by Judge Huw Rees at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court has raised questions, in this case passed after less than an hour, and the inspector admitted his errors. Had he not admitted his errors don't know what the outcome would have been.

However it seems County Council Trading Standards are willing to take inspectors to court, I think from memory the red means he is authorised by the scheme provider and green means outside of scheme. So clearly scheme should be informed. It says details of insulation covered by this report all of dwelling, so should be no LIM codes.
Also noting listed as circuits venerable to damage when testing, which could have been another reason for LIM codes.

Having listed as reason for testing as possible sale of property, then it is the same as with "Mark Cummins trading as M C Electrics v Pembrokeshire County Council Trading Standards" so may be trading standards should be involved, however I made a mistake getting the LABC involved with mothers house, I thought they were already involved, so I thought it was a simple case of changing name of person doing the work, but you can't un-tell them, and once they had the bit between their teeth there was no letting go, it caused so much hassle.

So the questions are:-
1) Why bother with an EICR if selling? it is up to the buyers to have that done.
2) Have you refused to pay saying if he wants to take it further you will involve trading standards.

The big question is when you get the solicitors forms, can you say hand on heart I don't know condition of electrical system?

 

[securespark]

It wasn't commissioned by me. I believe she has paid already.

I will make her aware of the errors and will let the spark know too.

If necessary, I will chat to the NIC, not that they will care a great deal.

Am going back at some point to test a couple of earth terminals on the lighting to see what (if any) Zs there is.

 

[securespark]

I thought about the 16A lighting MCB point.

Or is it a 13A socket on a 32A breaker type of situation?

Read this:

Changes in Amendment 3 to BS 7671: 2008 relating to final circuits supplying lighting points

Amendment 3 to BS 7671: 2008 introduced changes in how the regulations relating to certain types of lighting installations are arranged. This article identifies these changes.

www.voltimum.co.uk

In the socket situation, it is obvious the 13A socket terminals are able to carry FLC.

But 6A roses? Is it down to what is written in BS67?

 

[securespark]

Not counting points served is N/A?

 

[ericmark]

The problem is what to do about the report, as you say a 5/6 amp ceiling rose may well be able to take 16 amp, but since rated at 5/6 amp can't really say he is wrong.

And a wooden fuse box may be serviceable and there is no requirement to fit RCD protection, but good advice to change consumer unit, however if selling who should change it? Seems daft to fit a all RCBO consumer unit before selling house, but on buying house a all RCBO unit would be best option, so in real terms the buyer needs to decide what to do, not the seller.

I did it with father-in-laws house, the central heating boiler had not been looked at in years, it failed the motorised valve stuck, so we wanted to get a service package to remove the need to travel 100 miles to do a repair, we had more to and from trips to get the firm to accept the system than soft Mick, we tried to cancel it all when father-in-law died, but they said it would move to new owners, so house sold and still not sorted, and they asked for assess to house, and were told too late, house sold, only then did they refund money, and first think new owners did was renew the boiler anyway.

We had same problem with solar panels, and again new owner removed them.

A lick of paint and getting the place tidy yes, but major work like renewing a consumer unit, simply not worth while.

So you have a useless document, we can point out it says all of dwelling and reason for EICR is to sell it. So there should be no LIM entered and it seems many items marked N/A are applicable like number of points served, but it is up to buyer to get the EICR done not the seller, should the inspector make an error, then if his contract is with the seller, then the buyer would need to take seller to court, and the seller take the inspector to court, unless that bad you can get trading standards involved, so you simply don't want an EICR as the seller, better if you can simply say don't know.

 

[flameport]

But 6A roses? Is it down to what is written in BS67?

The scope of BS67 is:

requirements for ceiling roses having maximum ratings of 6 A
and 250 V intended for use in final circuits rated at 16 A maximum
for ceiling roses with screw-type supply terminals or 10 A maximum
for ceiling roses with screwless supply terminals.

It's a requirement that the rose itself is rated 250V and a maximum of 6A, however that's only for the lamp or other load connected to the rose, not the terminals themselves.

BS67 includes various tests intended to be done by manufacturers, one of which is connecting it to a 16A load so that the current passes through the terminals (as if wired into a circuit with all of the current passing via the rose to other parts of the circuit.
Another is with a 6A load connected where the lamp would be using flex, and at the same time having an additional 10A current pass through the terminals in the rose.

There is no problem at all with screw terminal ceiling roses connected to a 16A circuit. Obviously the wiring size, installation method and so on also applies to the circuit as a whole, but 1.5mm² would be plenty for 16A in most normal installations.

If the rose had screwless terminals, the maximum would be a 10A circuit.

 

[securespark]

Thank you, much obliged!

I have just been back to see my step-Mum, I shall post an update later.

 

[plugwash]

1.5mm² would be plenty for 16A in most normal installations.

Are you saying lighting cables burried under loft insulation is not normal?

 

[securespark]

Sorry I'm late with this. Came home knackered and fell asleep!

TCALSS, I found good Zs readings at all the roses and light switch screws I tried, apart from the switch in the hall, which I suspect is the one he tried and formed the opinion that there was no earth. I kick myself because I ran out of time and wanted to pull the switch off the wall to check out why.
I suspect the switch box may be a pre 14th one with no earth terminal, or one with nylon screw lugs or the connection has come adrift.

 

[securespark]

Oh, and I think the pendants (old MK style with the separate ring) were pre-14th Ed. There was no earth terminal, so inside each rose was a terminal block for the CPCs.

Going to email the chap.

Not sure how to tackle the imperial cable sizes with him. The forms are not really geared up for imperial and a lot of sparks cannot identify the different CSAs or know the CCCs.

 

[scousespark]

Sorry I'm late with this. Came home knackered and fell asleep!

TCALSS, I found good Zs readings at all the roses and light switch screws I tried, apart from the switch in the hall, which I suspect is the one he tried and formed the opinion that there was no earth. I kick myself because I ran out of time and wanted to pull the switch off the wall to check out why.
I suspect the switch box may be a pre 14th one with no earth terminal, or one with nylon screw lugs or the connection has come adrift.

Did you confirm the IR on the cables? If the readings are valid, it looks like a case where the inspector has determined the installation needs replacing.