Domestic lighting circuit protection

[SPECIAL LOCATION]

It's not hard to understand poni,it's a question I was asked by a guy who was going to sell his house,it was tested by a NAPIT spark who said the lighting urgently needed to be RCD controlled and as such did not pass and that a code 3 meant urgent action !
I have been retired for a number of years now after being the qualified supervisor for the NICEIC for many years and wondered why a perfectly safe electrical installation had become unsafe with the stroke of a pen,hence my asking the question.

Sounds like someone who does not know what he is talking about to me??
C3 = Improvement Recommended.. (Pg 520 model forms BS7671)

C1 or C2 cannot be satisfactory...
And C3 cannot mean Unsatisfactory!!


Please gentlemen, no need to be abusive towards each other.

 

[Andy™]

and as such did not pass and that a code 3 meant urgent action !

if only the meaning of the codes was also printed on the EICR form. sounds like someone desperate for work, or if its the buyers spark, someone trying to get the price knocked down

 

[Murdoch]

If this is an obvious issue, then it does make you wonder about the quality and competence of the report...........

 

[kerching]

I've seen an EICR where C3 had been defined as Improvement REQUIRED!
Also said installation was ILLEGAL

pity I didn't get a copy of it, I just ran away

 

[mort2376]

Loads of properties out there with no rcd protection on all circuits let alone the lighting alone.

C3 all the way for an EICR.

I always put in the comment box the following....

"Circuit does not comply to current BS7671 18th edition wiring regulations, however these are not applied retrospectively and the circuit would have complied at the time of installation, therefore improvement is only recommended"

Alot of the issue is newly qualified sparks have only known regs where everything must be rcd protected and don't grasp the vast range of regulations that may have once applied.

I have 14th edition books onwards on my shelf. Mostly gathering dust but handy for reference if needed.

 

[grumpy old spark]

Thanks for the info

Loads of properties out there with no rcd protection on all circuits let alone the lighting alone.

C3 all the way for an EICR.

I always put in the comment box the following....

"Circuit does not comply to current BS7671 18th edition wiring regulations, however these are not applied retrospectively and the circuit would have complied at the time of installation, therefore improvement is only recommended"

Alot of the issue is newly qualified sparks have only known regs where everything must be rcd protected and don't grasp the vast range of regulations that may have once applied.

I have 14th edition books onwards on my shelf. Mostly gathering dust but handy for reference if needed.

I agree,common sense doesn't isn't applied by some but 'scare tactics' are used BTW I still have my 12th edition blue regs book also got an RCD tester in a wooden box from that era.God I'm old ,lol,but that old tester proves that they weren't invented as some think as a requirement of the 17th Ed when the 2391 came about,ha ha.

 

[druid77]

Sounds like someone who does not know what he is talking about to me??
C3 = Improvement Recommended.. (Pg 520 model forms BS7671)

C1 or C2 cannot be satisfactory...
And C3 cannot mean Unsatisfactory!!


Please gentlemen, no need to be abusive towards each other.

I am not a spark but read these columns for education. In the assessment industry that I retired from we had

Optimum (excellent design should be included in future designs)
Satisfactory (Fully meets all current requirements)
Unsatisfactory (But acceptable - may fall short of current requirements but not considered a safety issue - give recommendations to make Satisfactory)
Unacceptable (give recommendations to move up to unsatisfactory or sat)

By this use of the English language "C3 Improvement recommended" could easily be Unsatisfactory - but acceptable.

 

[Fleeting]

It is suggested in BS7671 that C1 to FI should be deemed unsatisfactory but it does not quote the reverse as to when it is satisfactory.

 

[grumpy old spark]

Sorry to throw a spanner in the works everyone but I have just found out from the guy who had his test carried out by the NAPIT spark that that he meant it was marked as a C2.

 

[UNG]

Sorry to throw a spanner in the works everyone but I have just found out from the guy who had his test carried out by the NAPIT spark that that he meant it was marked as a C2.

So given it is now a C2 what observation detail has he attached to this to justify this coding

 

[grumpy old spark]

So given it is now a C2 what observation detail has he attached to this to justify this coding

He stated that does not comply with 18th ed BS7671 needs urgent attention !

 

[binky]

It's not hard to understand poni,it's a question I was asked by a guy who was going to sell his house,it was tested by a NAPIT spark who said the lighting urgently needed to be RCD controlled and as such did not pass and that a code 3 meant urgent action !

Drivel! Yet another semi trained spark.

 

[Murdoch]

He stated that does not comply with 18th ed BS7671 needs urgent attention !

What is his justification for that?

I think he has read the PRS legislation which suggests that this is the case but as the legislation isn't likely to be changed does that mean that all subsequent changes to BS 7671 can be ignored?

The legislation says it should be inspected to the 18th edition

Written by muppets , chaired by Clancy

 

[poni]

I have been retired for a number of years now after being the qualified supervisor for the NICEIC for many years

Has it not always been the case that the electrical regs are not retrospective, I know when I was doing my time (14th ed) this was the case ,what did you do in your days as a qualifying supervisor, was it not the same? (or did you work for the NICEIC as a supervisor)
even some jobs done to early edition's of the 18th ed (2018) would not comply with the current 18th ed (2023)

I don't really know why its hard to understand this comment was not aimed at you "old spark", it was just me venting off in general

 

[poni]

I still have my 12th edition blue regs book also got an RCD tester in a wooden box from that era.

the 12th edition was the 1950's and the tester would have been a ELCB would it not? not a RCD testser

 

[grumpy old spark]

the 12th edition was the 1950's and the tester would have been a ELCB would it not? not a RCD testser

Just testing you poni, lol yes it is an ELCB tester thats in the wooden box,but I do have a very old (like me)RCD tester.Im allowed to use the wrong name now and again,being old tho.I took no offence at your comment,my fault if I didn't explain myself.
When I was training in the early 60s we had the old regs at night school in the cupboard I 'obtained' a copy maybe thinking it might be valuable, but I think I was wrong.

 

[SPECIAL LOCATION]

Sorry to throw a spanner in the works everyone but I have just found out from the guy who had his test carried out by the NAPIT spark that that he meant it was marked as a C2.

He stated that does not comply with 18th ed BS7671 needs urgent attention !

Are you able to contact this guy to question his reasoning?
And did you get chance to browse the Best Practice Guide 4?
https://www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk/media/fpton1au/bpg4-a5-2022.pdf

As Page 24 suggests it is endorsed by Napit.. (along with other industry recognised bodies).

And.. Page 19 recommends that the "Absence of additional protection by RCD for AC final circuits supplying luminaires in domestic household premises" is a code "C3"

I cannot fathom how this could require urgent attention??
In my opinion, this bloke is a 100% Twat.... with minimal knowledge, competence, experience.. etc..

 

[Murdoch]

I suspect the Napit spark is using his code breakers book and we all know what that says

 

[mort2376]

I suspect the Napit spark is using his code breakers book and we all know what that says

Had a look at codebreakers and the only reason it's a C2 is for sockets used for outside equipment.

The only other reason no rcd is a c2 which I disagree with is cables buried in walls at less than 50mm depth.

For older properties that last one is too harsh and it was safe at the time of install so to me can only be a C3.

The codebreakers book is a useful guide. But it is a guide it's not a definitive bible and part of EICRs is making that informed decision as the person on the job.

Too many people think there is a black or white answer to every problem !

 

[UNG]

I cannot fathom how this could require urgent attention??

The skillset of some of those carrying out EICR's needs urgent attention but as long as they are endorsed by a scheme they will continue to produce subpar and below standard EICR's.
Remedial work could be a big earner for them and most remedial work is not that difficult to do

In my opinion, this bloke is a 100% Twat.... with minimal knowledge, competence, experience.. etc..

Not familiar with that acronym when assessing someones competence or lack of

I'm sure that on groups like this where the outcome EICR's is questioned we only see a miniscule number of the dodgy poor quality below par EICR's that are carried out across the UK and with the current training and assessment models I think the situation is only going to get worse

You only have to look at Clancy's achievements she mentions she grew Certsure's business but makes no mention of improving electrical safety or overseeing better levels of training to achieve recognition by the scheme she oversaw instead, she set a lower benchmark that others followed but that doesn't make good reading on a job experience profile when you are trying to be a high flying executive