1. Visiting from the US? Why not try DIYnot.US instead? Click here to continue to DIYnot.US.
    Dismiss Notice

Failed EICR

Discussion in 'Electrics UK' started by Alexj01uk, 9 Aug 2021.

Tags:
  1. Alexj01uk

    Alexj01uk

    Joined:
    9 Aug 2021
    Messages:
    2
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Hi all
    I own a three bed house and I'm currently renting to a friend after moving in with my girlfriend.
    I only recently became aware of the necessity to complete an EICR which I booked as soon as I found out. The property has failed the EICR due to the fuse board not being up to spec and I'm now being quoted £700 to fit a new fuse board.
    The electrician has said that I need an 18th edition RCBO fuse board with SPD protection, tails and earth upgrade.
    Is this a common fail since the EICR became mandatory and is that a reasonable price to pay for the upgrade?
    As the tenants are already living in the property does it mean that it's unsafe and they have to leave the property until the work is carried out?
    I don't want to put anyone at risk even if there haven't been any obvious problems with the fuse board.

    Thanks for any advice.
     
  2. Sponsored Links
  3. sparkwright

    sparkwright

    Joined:
    20 Aug 2009
    Messages:
    8,784
    Thanks Received:
    1,102
    Location:
    Dorset
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    What is your old consumer unit like??
     
  4. AndyPRK

    AndyPRK

    Joined:
    4 Jan 2009
    Messages:
    5,887
    Thanks Received:
    593
    Location:
    Herefordshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    If there are any C1 they need an urgent fix.
     
  5. ericmark

    ericmark

    Joined:
    27 Jan 2008
    Messages:
    18,614
    Thanks Received:
    1,746
    Location:
    Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Code C1 = dangerous which is near enough, however code C2 = potentially dangerous and lets face it 230 volt is always potentially dangerous. The problem is there is no standard to work to, we have regulations which state the date after which a design must follow them, but it is the design date, not the commissioning date, so a new property can have an installation which when first used does not comply with current regulations.

    However we don't go into a property armed with a bookcase full of regulations so we can select the correct one, the new law says BS7671:2018 but BS7671:2018 gives the design date at which it needs to be followed, so in essence it redirects one to an earlier version.

    But again BS7671 is not retrospective, but HSE laws and CENELEC harmonization documents are, so although it may comply with the wiring regulations it may not be legal to use, the only way we can be sure it is legal is to use the current regulations. However this means a new building could fail.

    The IET felt that having a code to say it does not comply with current regulations if designed today was unhelpful, so code 4 which was just that was removed, so we have 7 codes:-
    • C1 = Danger Present (FAIL)
    • C2 = Potentially Dangerous (FAIL)
    • C3 = Improvement Recommended.
    • FI = Further Investigation Required (FAIL)
    • N/V = Not Verified (Unable to verify)
    • N/A = Not Applicable.
    • LIM = Limitation (Not tested or inspected)
    Some are nearly the same LIM and FI for example, we would give a FI if a room was locked, but if for example the garage was not rented with the house, that could get a LIM.

    However the demarcation between code C2 and C3 is rather vague, as long as the inspector lists the problems he has done his job, so one inspector may give a C2 for no RCD and another a C3. There is a problem with bathrooms, in 2008 the edition of BS7671 released allowed items in bathrooms not to be bonded if it was RCD protected with a 30 mA RCD, so if both bonding and RCD missing then clearly a code C2.

    Through the years there have been changes, my parents house built 1954 had wooden back boxes behind the light switches, and bakelite switches, of a design where there was no metal that could be touched that could be earthed, but in 1966 the rules changed and earths had to be run to all lights except for the actual pendent. So all GU10 lamps must have an earth available even if not used.

    So the big question is how far back can one go? At one time we had knife switches with exposed live parts, that is clearly not acceptable today.

    So you have a law which needs case law to clarify the finer points, but who is going to allow themselves to be taken to court rather than spend £500 on some safety items? So it is unlikely there will be court case to clarify the new law. So each inspector has his own idea as to where the demarcation line should lie.

    So back to "Potentially Dangerous" if HSE laws and CENELEC harmonization documents say it is not permitted, that does not mean it is "Potentially Dangerous" the inspector can give "Improvement Recommended" and he has not broken any rule, he has to do what it says on the can, he has to decide if it is "Potentially Dangerous".

    So a sound house, with rental rules which do not permit and drilling of the walls, and there are no sockets likely to be used outside, the inspector could well say RCD not required, but a house with leaking roof, and a large garden with a pond in it with fountains etc, he would likely say hang on for this house we really need RCD protection to be safe.

    Same with metal consumer units, a plastic consumer unit in the kitchen and multiple escape routes no real problem, the same consumer unit under wooden stairs which are the only escape route, and no really does need to be metal.

    But this means the inspector needs to use his skill to judge what passes and what fails, easier to just fail anything without RCD protection. But how far does one go? Does one say an electric car could be parked there and so we want not only RCD protection but RCD protection using a type B RCD and since a TN-C-S supply a voltage detector to auto disconnect supply if the voltage is not 207 to 253 volt, I think most would say that is going OTT, but could not say wrong.

    So really the law is an ass, it should have been like a car MOT with in the main a good manual to guide the inspectors, most seem to think Electrical Safety First Best Practice Guide No. 4 (Issue 5)
    Electrical installation condition reporting: Classification Codes for domestic and similar electrical installations.
    is the best option when deciding what codes to issue, not perfect, but it is reasonable. In this guide we have fuse-box-1.jpg this picture of a fuse box without any RCD protection and made of bakelite so not really fire resistant and it says it can continue to provide satisfactory service, so it would seem following best practice lack of RCD is not a fail.

    However my own house the old Wylex fuse box has been removed and replaced with a metal consumer unit all RCBO with a SPD. And I would recommend today everyone should have RCD protection and that since my CU is not in the main house, I don't want to be forced to go outside and down a set of steps in the snow because the RCD has tripped, and one RCBO's are less likely to trip, and two if one does trip I have only lost that circuit. As to the SPD not sure if really needed, but I have heard complaints about LED bulbs failing, and as yet in this house not had to replace any LED lights, not saying that is due to the SPD, but it may explain why I have not lost a light and others have.

    To my mind to find some one to change a fuse box for a consumer unit within 28 days is a tall order, it took me 4 months to get around to changing it, it is one of those jobs you do when freezer is empty. Or at least not much in it. If the bathroom has missing bonding then yes it is a must that either bonding installed or RCD fitted, but unless that is the case, then really only a code C3.
     
  6. sxturbo

    sxturbo

    Joined:
    12 Jan 2014
    Messages:
    4,063
    Thanks Received:
    586
    Location:
    Essex
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Post the cert up.

    Sounds like a chancer trying to get more money.

    As Eric mark said, the design was long before 18th edition and this should not be expected to meet such regulations.

    Unless there is a fault within the system other than "it's old" then it can only be a recommendation to upgrade the consumer unit.

    So unless there is a failure in the circuits it is not unsafe for your friend to reside in the house.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Sponsored Links
  8. oldbutnotdead

    oldbutnotdead

    Joined:
    11 Jan 2013
    Messages:
    4,538
    Thanks Received:
    944
    Location:
    Durham
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Pic of the existing CU would be helpful as well...the important bit on the report is the sheet(s) with lines ending C1, C2, C3 etc
    Price- depends what the report says, that is a bit steep for a straight swap.
     
  9. Alexj01uk

    Alexj01uk

    Joined:
    9 Aug 2021
    Messages:
    2
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Thanks for your in-depth replies. I will post up a copy of the cert as soon as I receive it.
     
  10. flameport

    flameport

    Joined:
    10 Mar 2007
    Messages:
    9,923
    Thanks Received:
    1,988
    Location:
    Poole, Dorset
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    That isn't an unreasonable price, but obviously depends on what was quoted for and whether it was needed in the first place.
     
  11. ericmark

    ericmark

    Joined:
    27 Jan 2008
    Messages:
    18,614
    Thanks Received:
    1,746
    Location:
    Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    As said regulations are not retrospective so if OK when installed and has not degraded then not breaking wiring regulations, but may make sense to upgrade.
    If the fuse board is swapped for a consumer unit yes it will need to be to current regulations, but as to SPD it depends on supply type and although I have used RCBO's (which is a RCD and MCB combined) the twin RCD board is still used.
    Yes common fail, the EICR was never designed to be a legal requirement, and until the new law no one batted an eye lid if C2 code used where C3 was more appropriate. Since all RCBO likely a good price.
    Your last comment is something which has been talked about a lot, court cases have resulted in landlady being fined a huge amount when due to a fault with the installation and a fault with tenants oil filled radiator, the tenant was killed, in spite of the landlady doing everything she could to correct it, she had engaged an electrician but he had not got around to correcting the fault, the court seemed to think the tenants should be rehoused until the faults were corrected.

    However with an EICR under new landlord laws, the inspector should not leave the premises if any code C1 items have not been made safe, that could be simply locking off a MCB, so for example no sockets working, but he must leave the premises safe. And the new law actually says you have 28 days to correct faults, so I would say no problem.
     
Loading...

Share This Page