EICR For Dad's Widow

[securespark]

Oddly, the only C2 is lack of RCD protection.

 

[JohnW2]

Oddly, the only C2 is lack of RCD protection.

... but only for the socket(s) "likely to be used to power outdoor equipment" (all the other 'lack of RCD' items beings C3s) - which I think/suspect is what a lot of people would probably say/do.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Perhaps the relevant sockets should not have been installed if they are potentially dangerous.

 

[securespark]

There was an sRCD in the hall. He said that didn't count....

 

[JohnW2]

Perhaps the relevant sockets should not have been installed if they are potentially dangerous.

Well (per regs) no socket should be installed today without RCD protection and, if I recall correctly, no socket "likely to be used to power outdoor equipment" without RCD protection should have been installed under 17th - but the socket may well have been installed prior to either of those editions.

However, the question of whether a socket "likely to be used to power outdoor equipment" installed many years ago (without RCD protection) was then any more dangerous than it would be ('perceived as being') today is 'an interesting question'

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Well (per regs) no socket should be installed today without RCD protection and, if I recall correctly, no socket "likely to be used to power outdoor equipment" without RCD protection should have been installed under 17th - but the socket may well have been installed prior to either of those editions.

I know.

However, the question of whether a socket "likely to be used to power outdoor equipment" installed many years ago (without RCD protection) was then any more dangerous than it would be ('perceived as being') today is 'an interesting question'.

Exactly.

One must assume that, as it is now deemed potentially dangerous by not having had something done to it, it must have been the same when installed.


Unless of course - it isn't.

 

[JohnW2]

Exactly. One must assume that, as it is now deemed potentially dangerous by not having had something done to it, it must have been the same when installed. ... Unless of course - it isn't.

We've been through all this before. Views vary over time as to what is 'acceptably safe' (i.e. not 'too dangerous' to be acceptable) - and that applies to many things if you compare today with the days of our youth.

In other words, whilst 'how dangerous' something is obviously does not change over time, our (society's) view of the acceptability of any particular danger/risk will often change.

Kind Regards, John