EICR - ReWire recommended

[Crombie2000]

Hi Peeps,

have just had the above done for a house I'm purchasing. The electrician is recommending a full rewire but I'd like a view from here if possible. Thoughts?

Problem areas, please see pic.

Thanks

Jaz

 

[EFLImpudence]

Well, there are several mistakes in the document. So ...

It is not a proper EICR report form and schedules. Is that all you have?

Nothing on it has any bearing on whether you need a rewire or not.
Oviously we do not know from here.

 

[John D v2.0]

That document is a bit of a joke, everything is a c2? Maybe he couldn't be bothered and this is just a sales document to scare you. No cpc sleeving is hardly a c2, more like a C4.

 

[Crombie2000]

Thanks John, that's helpful. You've given me something to go back to the electrician with. Otherwise I don't know how to challenge it.

I can share the full report if helpful, was not sure if it would be?

J

 

[EFLImpudence]

1 &2 - Fair enough but seems odd that both are the same.
3 - Nothing wrong with that. Just wrong as stated.
4 & 5 - Ok, easily repaired.
6 - Don't know if relevant or not. Might be if lights are near a bath or shower.
7 - Ok, easily repaired.
8 - There should be sleeving, but not potentially dangerous so should be C3.
9 - There should be grommets, but not potentially dangerous so should be C3.
10 - If there is a 3A fused connector unit for the boiler, then just wrong. (although there is an obscure instruction in the regulations which states that the minimum sized cable for a power circuit is 1.5 - but we don't know any circuits which do not use power).
11 - Hardly potentially dangerous so should be C3.
12 - Fair enough, if true.
13 & 14 - Fair enough. Don't know why.
15 - Fair enough, if true.

 

[Crombie2000]

Brilliant EFL thank you.

I'm picking up that while the stuff may need sorting it's not that big a deal, certainly not a re-wire? Would that be covered by another bit of the doc?

Thanks again!

 

[Risteard]

9 - There should be grommets, but not potentially dangerous so should be C3.

A lack of grommets can be potentially dangerous - we have no idea what kind of pressure the cable is under into the sharp edges. We also don't know whether it is protected by the sheath at that point. Depending on the circumstances it could be either a C2 or a C3 (or a C1 if it has caused the backbox to become energised which is also not earthed and therefore remains live). It might be no code if the plaster around it prevents the cable from coming into contact with it.

 

[EFLImpudence]

A lack of grommets can be potentially dangerous - we have no idea what kind of pressure the cable is under into the sharp edges.

Not potentially dangerous as the protective device will operate.

We also don't know whether it is protected by the sheath at that point.

Then that would have been a non-compliance.

Depending on the circumstances it could be either a C2 or a C3 (or a C1 if it has caused the backbox to become energised which is also not earthed and therefore remains live).

That surely would have been mentioned.

It might be no code if the plaster around it prevents the cable from coming into contact with it.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I'm picking up that while the stuff may need sorting it's not that big a deal, certainly not a re-wire? Would that be covered by another bit of the doc?

Only if you have really old crumbly black rubber cables or something drastically wrong, which you would think would have been mentioned on that document.

Needing a rewire would presumably mean none of the present wiring is fit for purpose.




I am afraid a lot of 'electricians' are really not competent to do EICRs.

 

[Risteard]

Not potentially dangerous as the protective device will operate.

Couldn't possibly agree with that reasoning. If that was the case then exposed live parts on RCD protected circuits would not be potentially dangerous as the RCD should operate. I can't subscribe to that view.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Perhaps I should have said "The protective device would have already operated".

 

[Crombie2000]

I am afraid a lot of 'electricians' are really not competent to do EICRs.

Which is why it's fantastic to be able to get advice from places like this.

Many thanks all.

 

[aptsys]

A lack of grommets can be potentially dangerous

What reg are you thinking of that says grommets must be installed?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Not this again.

 

[ericmark]

As said I see nothing in the report that refers to wiring. Most seems rather minor. When one spots errors one does have to ask is this a proper EICR, the standard RCD should not trip at 15 mA, it should trip at 30 mA and must trip within 40 mS at 150 mA.

I looked for tripping times at 30 mS and it seems this depends on the BS number of the RCD I can't find anything in my copy of BS7671:2008 giving a time for disconnection at 30 mA only at 5 x 30 mA. However This pocket guide by elecsa does give times, 200 mS, 300 mS, 130 ~ 500 mS so don't know where 400 mS comes from?

But the way it is listed says nothing really. 6 mm² cable rating depends on type and how installed the link shows 54 and 58 amp for 6 mm² cable. OK if routed through insulation and the cable has a lower working temperature it may be the cable can't take 40 amp, but it does not specify.

Kitchen socket cracked, well that's not a big job, same with faulty what ever the fault is not a big job to change.

Bathroom in zones 1 and 2: IPX4 nothing about IP44 it could be IP54 and still pass. If the light is over 2.25 meters high then out of zone 1 and 2, also 0.6 meters from bath or shower tray, I would think most bathrooms before 1990 did not have lights that comply, again easy to correct.

So the whole list is minor work, so nothing in list would make me consider a re-wire.