EICs

[sparkyspike]

So, if I were to disconnect the house from the CU and dead-test the tails and incomers, that's all they need? Sounds odd to me.

 

[Pensdown]

You need one circuit. The normal way is to install a 20amp radial to an RCD protected socket adjacent to the CU. You then dead test the CU and the new circuit in the normal way and fill out the EIC.

That's all the DNO require to make it live. It's then up to you to make sure the rest is up to standard before it's reconnected

 

[sparkyspike]

Ok. Perhaps this is what the other guy is intending to do.

 

[FingRinal]

'Clever' builders do most of the work and then get an electrician to do something to generate a certificate which can only include their own work.

Smart chaps do as has been suggested and make clever use of the 'Extent' portion of the Cert.

I back this up with a clear asterix next to each new circuit and use the last line on the Sched. Test Result thus:

* denotes existing circuit (or new circuit whichever is fewer).

But you can't issue an EIC for someone else unless you witness 1st fix. If you are prepared to accept the risk and the liability, I'm sure there are plenty of unscrupulous (and soon to be desperate) electricians who will do it.

 

[Pensdown]

Ok. Perhaps this is what the other guy is intending to do.

I very much doubt it. He will probably do what FR has suggested some do

The only legitimate way to issue an EIC for reconnection is....
Remove all of the circuits.
Install 1 new circuit as above
Make sure the earthing and tails are up tp scratch
Dead test the CU and the one new circuit then fax a copy of the part completed EIC to the DNO
Once live, carry out the live tests for the new circuit and issue the completed EIC and notify the work.

Then..
Test existing circuits and reconnect only if OK
Issue a PIR for the existing circuits.

As said, there is no legitimate way to third party issue an EIC for the existing circuits.

 

[GaryMo]

Doing it that way who will take responsibility for the design of the circuits and selection of the correct protective devices?
Your EIC will show a consumer unit with one circuit connected then suddenly it develops 10 MCB's and final circuits?
You can't carry out work without certifying it. Connecting multiple final circuits into a consumer unit that didn't have the very same final circuits (check EIC!) can't be covered by a PIR as it's merely a report on an existing installation.

 

[Pensdown]

What if the PIR was carried out before the circuits were disconnected?

 

[GaryMo]

What if the PIR was carried out before the circuits were disconnected?

Which resulted in a satisfactory assessment?
God knows why an EIC would then be required for reconnection!

 

[Pensdown]

In that case I agree with you and I would issue a PIR. At the end of the day, you probably know the certificate procedures better than the person from EDF who requested the wrong one.

But if they insist on an EIC.....

 

[GaryMo]

But if they insist on an EIC.....

Then I would request I was put through to somebody who knew what they were talking about. I would then ask them how I can sign for the design and construction of somebody else's work and query why a PIR with a satisfactory assessment isn't an indication of a sound electrical installation (assuming none of the main tests were limited).
I would certainly be fighting that one.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I would then ask them how I can sign for the design and construction of somebody else's work.

But you're not - when you sign the I&T part of an EIC you are not certifying that the design and construction complies with BS 7671, you are only certifying that the work you did, i.e. the I&T, complies.

In terms of fighting the DNO, it might be worth pointing out to them that BS 7671 says that EICs are to be used only for the initial certification of a new installation or for an alteration or addition to an existing installation where new circuits have been introduced.

Then, if you can get high enough up the food chain for the person to understand it, try this:

"Why are you asking electricians to contravene BS 7671, and since there is a strong presumption in the EAWR that BS 7671 should be complied with why are you asking them to potentially break the law? Would you like me to report you to the HSE for this?"

 

[bongos]

Out of interest do we know yet why the power was disconnected?

I heard somewhere that it was now rare for a DNO to cut power for unpaid bills and that it far more likely for them to try and trace you and take you to court. If this is the case then I wonder if it was disconnected due to some form of dodgy installation?

I can't see how they would know this unless they had come to re-energise after some work had taken place and they noticed something hidiously wrong.

 

[GaryMo]

I would then ask them how I can sign for the design and construction of somebody else's work.

But you're not - when you sign the I&T part of an EIC you are not certifying that the design and construction complies with BS 7671, you are only certifying that the work you did, i.e. the I&T, complies.

Who would sign for the design and construction then? Would an EIC even be valid without them? I'm not sure it would so i cant see how an EIC can be completed.

 

[FingRinal]

You can't really sign for I&T unless you inspect accordingly at the relevant stages of construction.

Although the constuctor is signing for construction, which includes correct routing and installation of cables, the Inspector would have to put LIM on the Sched. Inspections in potentially 5 boxes.

But, this is the way the mighty and wonderful NICEIC do things. Heck, the bloke in the office doesn't even go to site unless there is a meeting he wants to get out of.

Edit: Gary, unless all three parts are signed, the EIC in not valid anyhow.

 

[GaryMo]

You cant place limitations on the schedule of items inspected which forms part of an EIC so no LIM's, only ticks or N/A.