PIR/EICR

[Simon35]

Just received an inspection report, or rather, just had it dropped on me, from a company in the same group.

The inspection report details code 1, 2, 3 and 4 faults - I thought these were now replaced with C1, C2, C3 on EICR?? Or can either be applied?

The installation is generally in a workshop environment - heavy fabrication, welding, fitting.

Couple of other bits stood out - signs of burning on a cable marked as code 3, thought would be code 1, cables with oversized fuses for the current carrying capacity of the cable, marked as code 3, would again thought should be code 1.

Just interested in peoples thoughts before I discuss with inspection company, cos its not something I get involved with much.

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[ericmark]

I have noted that the new codes class far less as code C1 then the old system classed as code 1.

I think there was a problem with an electrical condition report filled with code 1's as the person reading the report and authorising remedial work could select items which were not that dangerous to repair first leaving the really dangerous stuff to last.

So there has to be immediate danger to get a code C1.

I have worked in many industrial workshops where welding has caused earth wires to burn out and or be damaged and even after the repair there were still signs of burning so one does need some care when writing the report.

In one workshop all earth cables were 35mm or greater because of the problems with welding sets. The main problem was the use of old oil filled welding sets which are not class II and to link output and input earths is also dangerous there are a whole host of papers about the problems with oil filled welding transformers if it was up to me I would totally ban their use.

 

[B67BU]

Just received an inspection report, or rather, just had it dropped on me, from a company in the same group.

Was it a drive-by tester? All you need to know from our friendly inspector.

 

[Simon35]

I have noted that the new codes class far less as code C1 then the old system classed as code 1.

I think there was a problem with an electrical condition report filled with code 1's as the person reading the report and authorising remedial work could select items which were not that dangerous to repair first leaving the really dangerous stuff to last.

So there has to be immediate danger to get a code C1.

I have worked in many industrial workshops where welding has caused earth wires to burn out and or be damaged and even after the repair there were still signs of burning so one does need some care when writing the report.

In one workshop all earth cables were 35mm or greater because of the problems with welding sets. The main problem was the use of old oil filled welding sets which are not class II and to link output and input earths is also dangerous there are a whole host of papers about the problems with oil filled welding transformers if it was up to me I would totally ban their use.

This was a phase conductor that showed signs of burning.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

I would be investigating that a little further! Could be coded anything!
C1 – Danger present. Risk of injury. Immediate remedial action required
C2 – Potentially dangerous. Urgent remedial action required
C3 – Improvement recommended

 

[JohnW2]

C3 – Improvement recommended

I still don't fully understand how people are applying this. Is the intention that, effectively, all of the previous 3- and 4-coded things should now become C3, or are a lot of (what would have been) minor code 4 things now not being coded at all?

Kind Regards, John.

 

[vibrobullit407]

I still don't fully understand how people are applying this. Is the intention that, effectively, all of the previous 3- and 4-coded things should now become C3, or are a lot of (what would have been) minor code 4 things now not being coded at all?

Kind Regards, John.

My interpretation is that if something is not dangerous but does not comply with current BS7671 I would put down a C3, due to the fact that I would "recommend improvement " but it is not essential.

 

[JohnW2]

My interpretation is that if something is not dangerous but does not comply with current BS7671 I would put down a C3, due to the fact that I would "recommend improvement " but it is not essential.

Thanks. Does that mean that, per your interpretation, everything that would have got a code 4 now gets a C3?

Kind Regards, John.

 

[RMS]

Thanks. Does that mean that, per your interpretation, everything that would have got a code 4 now gets a C3?

Kind Regards, John.

Probably so, I would have thought that anything that is recommended to be improved does not comply with BS7671 in some way.

There is now a separate tick box for further investigation.

 

[vibrobullit407]

Thanks. Does that mean that, per your interpretation, everything that would have got a code 4 now gets a C3?

Kind Regards, John.

That is my interpretation John. As said if I come across something that does not comply to current BS7671 (old code 4) then I mark this down as "improvement recommended". If something requires further investigation I mark it down as F/I.

 

[starspark]

Out of interest what would kind of things would you class as needing further investigation as opposed to a C3??

 

[JohnW2]

That is my interpretation John. As said if I come across something that does not comply to current BS7671 (old code 4) then I mark this down as "improvement recommended".

Fair enough. Thanks.

It seems slightly odd that one should always 'recommend improvement' when there is any lack of compliance with the current BS7671, when BS7671 itself acknowledges that things which are compliant with older editions (but not the current edition) are not necessarily 'unsafe' - i.e. the regs themselves presumably would not necessarily always 'recommend' bringing an installation up to current standards on safety grounds.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[RMS]

Out of interest what would kind of things would you class as needing further investigation as opposed to a C3??

Something that may present danger.

 

[vibrobullit407]

Out of interest what would kind of things would you class as needing further investigation as opposed to a C3??

For further investigation I might put down some thing like no fly leads to back boxes without a fixed lug, lack of sleeving on switch lines for example.

your turn!