Jump to content

DONT STAY LURKING AS A GUEST,

JOIN TEF AND BENEFIT FROM MEMBERSHIP:

CLICK HERE TO JOIN.
georgecscs

C1 C2 C3 codes help

Recommended Posts

georgecscs

Hello guys, I have a small problem assigning the correct codes for some visual faults. I am still confused and looking forward to find a good answer.
This is for examination only. It is to be 17'th edition compliant(not 18th).

So we have the following faults and observations requiring a fault code:

1: 13A Socket outlet >ring circuit>Reversed polarity  between L and N at the socket. 
2: same ring circuit>incorrect electrical connection at the spur(one leg connected into IN terminals and one leg into OUT terminal)instead of both into IN terminal (open ring). the spur is switched and fused.
3: 16A C socket> L2 and L3 reversed polarity at the socket terminals.
4: 16A C socket>unsatisfactory electrical connection>swa armour used as CPC>Armour  loose into gland.
5: bonding to gas and water using a single cable connected with plastic covered clamps with no (safety connection-do not remove) notice.
6: undersized earthing conductor(10mm) from distributor to main earth bar for 25mm incoming tails. (it should be 16)
7: incoming tails(3 phase) entering the board(metallic enclosure) through a hole approx 35mm . double insulated tails. no support ,no gland, loose, no mechanical protection around the hole(sharp edge) straight into main isolator.
8: 3 phase incoming tails double sheated with grey (outer sheat) for all tails and inner sheat with blue for neutral and brown for all phases. no colour indentification, no number or label for idenification of each phase.
9: boiler cable protected by a 20A B type mcb and terminated into OUT connectors of the switched spur and the flexi cable into IN connectors.(the board schedule shows 16A breaker). 1.5mm, 1mmCPC twin and earth cable.
10: reversed polarity on a  luminaire.
11: as per point 9, a departure from the installation circuit schedule when the actual MCB is different than the one stated in the board Schedule.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

George

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doc Hudson

Firstly, welcome to the forum, then Happy Christmas.

 

Now just to explain the typical approach most members take to any questions of this nature. ALL members give their advice and time free of charge, They are more than willing to offer as much help as they can to anyone who has shown they have tried first but are struggling with a concept. 99%+ of the time very few members are wiling to just churn out free answers on a homework/coursework questions, after they themselves have had to work very hard to understand and gain the qualifications, knowledge and expertise they have accumulated over the years.

 

I would suggest you copy & paste your post above and re-post but include what you think the answers are and why. Then you will most likely get a better response.

Tip:  You need to be thinking about the code descriptions. e.g. "Is there an immediate danger to people/property/or livestock,  or is there just a possibility of a danger if some other event occurs?  Is something non-compliant with current regs, but not in itself a danger to life or serious injury. Does something require further investigation as it is not possible to fully identify some aspect of the circuit characteristics?

 

Well done for asking, but give us a better clue of what you already know by posting your thoughts on the correct codes. Nobody is going to mock or disrespect you, as if they do, either myself or one of the other moderators/forum owners will be penalising them/removing their forum privileges and/or rights. 

 

Doc H.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy™

generally c1 kill you now. exposed lives etc

c2 kill you later - needs another fault to happen first - i.e no earthing. its fine until there's a fault

c3 does not comply with current regs

 

but as above, answer them yourself then someone will go over it. but as is, were not doing your homework for you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kerching
1 hour ago, Andy™ said:

c3 does not comply with current regs

 

'Improvement recommended........I find that an awful lot of  Insurance companies interpret this as "REQUIRED" and can get quite arsey when you point out their misunderstanding of English

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ProDave
8 hours ago, Andy™ said:

generally c1 kill you now. exposed lives etc

c2 kill you later - needs another fault to happen first - i.e no earthing. its fine until there's a fault

c3 does not comply with current regs

 

That is the most succinct and accurate description I have yet  seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bruspark

The installer needs a C1 form clipped to their tracksuit bottoms and their @rse kicked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Evans Electric
21 hours ago, georgecscs said:

Hello guys, I have a small problem assigning the correct codes for some visual faults. I am still confused and looking forward to find a good answer.
This is for examination only. It is to be 17'th edition compliant(not 18th).

So we have the following faults and observations requiring a fault code:

1: 13A Socket outlet >ring circuit>Reversed polarity  between L and N at the socket. 
2: same ring circuit>incorrect electrical connection at the spur(one leg connected into IN terminals and one leg into OUT terminal)instead of both into IN terminal (open ring). the spur is switched and fused.
3: 16A C socket> L2 and L3 reversed polarity at the socket terminals.
4: 16A C socket>unsatisfactory electrical connection>swa armour used as CPC>Armour  loose into gland.
5: bonding to gas and water using a single cable connected with plastic covered clamps with no (safety connection-do not remove) notice.
6: undersized earthing conductor(10mm) from distributor to main earth bar for 25mm incoming tails. (it should be 16)
7: incoming tails(3 phase) entering the board(metallic enclosure) through a hole approx 35mm . double insulated tails. no support ,no gland, loose, no mechanical protection around the hole(sharp edge) straight into main isolator.
8: 3 phase incoming tails double sheated with grey (outer sheat) for all tails and inner sheat with blue for neutral and brown for all phases. no colour indentification, no number or label for idenification of each phase.
9: boiler cable protected by a 20A B type mcb and terminated into OUT connectors of the switched spur and the flexi cable into IN connectors.(the board schedule shows 16A breaker). 1.5mm, 1mmCPC twin and earth cable.
10: reversed polarity on a  luminaire.
11: as per point 9, a departure from the installation circuit schedule when the actual MCB is different than the one stated in the board Schedule.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

George

That sounds like it was connected by a chimpanzee who had only done the "Short course"   TBH. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kerching

Unless I am missing the point here......is this a College Question\hypothetical situation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ProDave
11 hours ago, kerching said:

Unless I am missing the point here......is this a College Question\hypothetical situation?

I am unsure

 

From the way people are responding most think it is either his college homework, or a job he is trying to do the report on.

 

But I get the sneaking feeling the OP may have just had a load of work done and this is his observations on that work?

 

Perhaps he would care so come back and clarify the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kerching
On 24/12/2018 at 23:12, georgecscs said:

This is for examination only. It is to be 17'th edition compliant(not 18th)

This was the part  I was wary of

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
binky
On 25/12/2018 at 17:27, ProDave said:

That is the most succinct and accurate description I have yet  seen.

and also correct! It's also why I get annoyed with so called sparkies who insist anything old that isn't up to current regs is a C1./ C2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doc Hudson
On 25/12/2018 at 23:03, kerching said:

Unless I am missing the point here......is this a College Question\hypothetical situation?

 

That is the way I understood the question, i.e. I need help with a homework question. It sounds like too random a set of problems to be all on a genuine inspection.

 

Doc H.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kerching

Well,if it is a true situation then whoever did the job needs locking in a room with LFB, Dangling Sanitaryware and his new jumped up little twonk of a "trainee engineer".     And NO earplugs or way of putting his fingers in his ears. There will doubtless be loads of restraint gear in the basement left over from ECs bondage dungeon from when she got slotted/left very quickly to explore new avenues/passages

Edited by kerching

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phoenix
On 25/12/2018 at 10:48, kerching said:

'Improvement recommended........I find that an awful lot of  Insurance companies interpret this as "REQUIRED" and can get quite arsey when you point out their misunderstanding of English

 

I find its also one you have to be careful applying, its all too easy to mark non-compliances which are not C2 or C1 classifciation as C3, but in doing so you are recommending someone goes and does something about it, I'm guessing its the mid-set of using the old code from PIRs.

 

I suppose the insurance companies take on it is along the lines of "The electrical professional is recommending this is done - so why should be potentially accept a greater risk by allowing his recommendations to be ignored, even though they are recommendations and not a requirement to get a satisfactory outcome"

 

Such as green only sleeving on CPCs, no one really recommends someone should go and swap it all out for stuff with the yellow stripe. I think if you take the official line, then there is no need to note it on an EICR at all, sometimes it can be a usful record, so I prefer to note it, but without a code (A dash is inserted, so its clear the lack of a code is not a typing error). So therefore are not 'recommending' anything, and often this is clarified in the text of the observation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doc Hudson

 

23 hours ago, Phoenix said:

 

I find its also one you have to be careful applying, its all too easy to mark non-compliances which are not C2 or C1 classifciation as C3, but in doing so you are recommending someone goes and does something about it, I'm guessing its the mid-set of using the old code from PIRs.

 

I suppose the insurance companies take on it is along the lines of "The electrical professional is recommending this is done - so why should be potentially accept a greater risk by allowing his recommendations to be ignored, even though they are recommendations and not a requirement to get a satisfactory outcome"

 

Such as green only sleeving on CPCs, no one really recommends someone should go and swap it all out for stuff with the yellow stripe. I think if you take the official line, then there is no need to note it on an EICR at all, sometimes it can be a usful record, so I prefer to note it, but without a code (A dash is inserted, so its clear the lack of a code is not a typing error). So therefore are not 'recommending' anything, and often this is clarified in the text of the observation

 

Also, the point that far too many electricians doing inspection/condition reports miss, is that well over 90% of the information entered into the boxes, (and the coding), recommended on the model forms, means absolutely nothing to anyone who is not electrically trained. So the average homeowner, landlord, company boss, insurance assessor has no ability to interpret the overall summary condition of the installation as Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory, in relation to the circuit test readings, supply characteristics and any observation codes etc.

 

Whilst the summary condition box 'E' does have a couple of lines to put a few comments in, it can be more beneficial all round to add an extra sheet to a report, where a few extra lines of maybe half-dozen bullet points can simplify some of the observations into more layman's terms regarding their importance and suggested course of action. Too often I find the observations box 'K' and summary box 'E' are actually not big enough to write sufficient detail to actually help the client understand the anomalies you have found. Hence you end up with a lot of short one-liner descriptions plus a Code, which can be open to misinterpretation of what you actually mean. (If you look at the example form in guidance Note3 the summary box is crammed with 5 lines of small text that only just fits!). Remember there is no rule that says you cannot add any extra sheets to accompany any form of electrical certificate or condition report, if you consider a bit of further detail would be beneficial to reduce confusion or misinterpretation for your client.

 

Doc H.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sidney

I tend to add an extra sheet with photos and explanation of the fault/coding for the customer to understand. Also I would give them repair/replacement options for them to consider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kerching

I do pics with an id notifier next to the pic

then include these on separate sheets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phoenix
13 hours ago, Doc Hudson said:

Whilst the summary condition box 'E' does have a couple of lines to put a few comments in, it can be more beneficial all round to add an extra sheet to a report, where a few extra lines of maybe half-dozen bullet points can simplify some of the observations into more layman's terms regarding their importance and suggested course of action. Too often I find the observations box 'K' and summary box 'E' are actually not big enough to write sufficient detail to actually help the client understand the anomalies you have found. Hence you end up with a lot of short one-liner descriptions plus a Code, which can be open to misinterpretation of what you actually mean. (If you look at the example form in guidance Note3 the summary box is crammed with 5 lines of small text that only just fits!). Remember there is no rule that says you cannot add any extra sheets to accompany any form of electrical certificate or condition report, if you consider a bit of further detail would be beneficial to reduce confusion or misinterpretation for your client.

 

 

 

Agree'd, if you have anything more than a satisfactory domestic report with a few small observations, then it is simply easier to write 'See attatched report' in the observations and summary boxes, then you can have a word processed report that details each item, in as much detail as required (some issues need a paragraph to explain fully), along with a photograph for some issues (as per kerching - but I prefer to do them in line). A summary can also be as long as required to explain the key issues, what has caused them, and discuss possible plans for rectifying the issues. The template includes a detailed explanation of the codes, and a section on the standard limitations applied to EICRs and has evolved over the years.... its always interesting when an EICR from another contractor comes in for remedials pricing and the template is clealy a cut and paste job from one of ours!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SPECIAL LOCATION

If its a domestic unsatisfactory....

 

Then the first thing a customer asks is how much will it cost to fix the problem?

 

So even though a condition report is purely an observation of the condition of the current installation.....

 

You normally end up with multiple options to provide a satisfactory report...

Which are best written and attached to the formal report....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phil d

I think this brings us back to the response you get when you complain to the NI about other contractors work, their standard response seems to be that it is down to the customer to make a complaint, not another spark, and this for me is where it is all wrong, for example.

I could wire an installation using 1mm for the lights, 1.5 for the sockets, and 4mm for the shower and cooker, I could use 6mm for the main earth and 2.5 for the bonds, it would be totally wrong, and we all know that, however so long as I made sure the sockets and switches were nice and level and at the correct height, then the average customer would be quite happy!

This is what annoys me, forget all the red tape, forget a rewire being notifiable under part P and all the other garbage that has crept in over the years, IF, the customer knew enough about electrical work to know whether something was wired in the correct sized cable, and if the cables were run in safe zones/ adequately protected, then given the cost of a rewire, he'd probably do it himself, so why is it down to the customer to complain that his sockets are wired wrong, or the supply to his shed is not done correctly?

I,m sure most of us have seen diy work that is of a better standard than work carried out by some so called "professionals", surely if an electrician reports another electrician for doing shoddy or dangerous work then the primary concern should be the quality of work, not whether the person making the complaint has a grudge against the person he is complaining about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SPECIAL LOCATION
4 hours ago, phil d said:

I think this brings us back to the response you get when you complain to the NI about other contractors work, their standard response seems to be that it is down to the customer to make a complaint, not another spark, and this for me is where it is all wrong, for example.

 

Example is irrelevant....

All this shows, once again how little people understand about the reality of contract law and complaints and disputes...

 

Any dispute is between the purchaser of some goods or services and the provider of the goods or services..

It is not a complex concept to grasp!!

 

If a customer is not willing to complain then whoever you want to complain to will have no legal access to see the work you want to dispute..

Thus can do sod all!!  

[ just as the NIC etc would not have access, or be able to investigate your claims or prove anything, so would be just wasting time & money trying to do so. ]

Again not to complex a concept to grasp..

 

AND.. if the customer will not testify, or has no copy of a contract, stating that the alleged work was carried out by A.N.Other...

Then Mr A.N.Other spark, doesn't actually have very much to defend! 

[  So once again NIC or whoever, cannot do much, or prove much, so would just be wasting time and money ]

 

All too often people moan about NIC being powerless...  

But I think you will find Trading Standards, or anyone else are all in the same legal boat...

 

e.g.

Purchaser complains about supplier of something or other..

Not friend or mate or brother-in-law, OR other contractor, complaining on behalf of purchaser of something else..

 

As they are NOT directly involved in  the contract, (written or verbal), they can do jack all!!!

I've lost count of the number of times over the years on here, this concept about being unable to complain about other contractors has come up...

But to summarise it....

 

Unless you are the Purchaser or Provider of some work...

OR you have been requested to act as an expert witness on behalf of either party....

Then you can huff and puff and moan as much as you like...

But you will get no-where as the Law is the Law!

 

If my mate bought a dangerous car from a garage... I couldn't have any legal involvement or action over the car... Only my mate and Garage.  (supplier & purchaser) 

Just as I cannot complain about work done by someone else in someone else's property, As I have no direct involvement with any of it!

 

I really don't understand why some electricians assume the law can work differently for electrical work compared to the supply of any other Goods or Services?

 

:C 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phil d

The point I was making was this, in the example of a car, if you buy a car and it has just passed it's mot, , but lets imagine that you know nothing about cars, and you don't realise that those brake  pipes shouldn't be almost rusted through, or those holes in the chassis, really shouldn't be there.  now if I ring VOSA on your behalf and explain that you know very little about cars, but you've bought this one, with a new MOT and it has a number of faults that mean it should have failed the test, VOSA will want to inspect the car, and, if they agree with me, they'll take action against the garage issuing the MOT. Sadly a certain organisation concerned with the electrical industry, will only deal with Joe Public, then asks technical questions, which they don't understand.

My original point was that WE as professionals need to police ourselves, as I said in my earlier post, as long as the accessories are level, then most people think the installation is correct, because they have no idea of the rules and regs that we must comply with. If we as professionals discover someone is carrying out shoddy and dangerous work, then is it not our duty as professionals to bring this to the attention of that persons governing body, if we fail to do this, does that not make us as bad as the person who has carried out the work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy™
14 minutes ago, phil d said:

 

My original point was that WE as professionals need to police ourselves,

 

does that mean i can start locking up people for dodgy work? do i get a dog to assist catching them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phil d
2 minutes ago, Andy™ said:

 

does that mean i can start locking up people for dodgy work? do i get a dog to assist catching them?

You know what I mean, if you come across some dodgy work and don't bring it to the attention of someone, then surely that makes you no better than the cowboy who carried it out. Plus, it has the potential to make you look bad later, spark 1 comes in to do a job and makes a mess of it, spark 2 comes in to do some other work, see's what spark 1 has done, but says nothing, spark 3 comes in, see's the shoddy work done by number 1, and mentions it to the client. Client then wonders why spark 2 didn't mention anything being wrong, and then starts to wonder if spark 2 was actually any good. At the end of the day, I don't make a habit of slagging other people off, but if they do carp work then they deserve it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SPECIAL LOCATION
2 hours ago, phil d said:

The point I was making was this, in the example of a car, if you buy a car and it has just passed it's mot, , but lets imagine that you know nothing about cars, and you don't realise that those brake  pipes shouldn't be almost rusted through, or those holes in the chassis, really shouldn't be there.  now if I ring VOSA on your behalf and explain that you know very little about cars, but you've bought this one, with a new MOT and it has a number of faults that mean it should have failed the test, VOSA will want to inspect the car, and, if they agree with me, they'll take action against the garage issuing the MOT. 

 

Still wrong. 

If you have a complaint about an MOT, Then someone with a legitimate interest in the MOT complaint must fill in form VT17 and send it off to DVSA..

The Garages do not issue MOT's as the Nominated Testers and Authorised examiners are working independently of the physical test station they may be working at..

 

It is the testers/examiners who are complained against NOT a garage.

either way... without a legitimate interest in the vehicle once again very little will actually happen!

 

:popcorn 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

Terms of UseWe have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.