EICR again – Which one is correct?

EICR again – Which one is correct?

9:56 AM, 15th October 2020, About 2 years ago 11

Text Size

In the NAPIT booklet EIRC Codebreakers 18th edition version Section 5.12.3 it states cables in walls not protected less than 50mm deep not RCD protected will be C2 failure.

In the Electrical installation condition reporting:

Classification codes for domestic and similar electrical installations Issue 5 it says on Page 14; Code C3 – Improvement recommended

Absence of RCD protection for cables installed at a depth of less than 50 mm from a surface of a wall or partition where the cables do not incorporate an earthed metallic covering, are not enclosed in earthed metalwork or are not mechanically protected against penetration by nails and the like.

Which one is correct?

Puzzled Landlord



Comments

EECLondon

9:26 AM, 17th October 2020, About 2 years ago

NAPIT Codebreaker publication is only a guide and should not be used by electricians to justify a failure of an installation. Regulation 651.2 note 2 outlines if the installation complied with a previous edition of the regulation it does not make it unsafe. I find you will always get the best advise from the NICEIC or IET technical which I am a member of both. I find NATIT are very blinkered and somewhat are trying to get attention to make a name for themselves. There are obvious failures in any installation that most all electricians/inspectors will agree on. If I find thermal damage type of issue without RCD protection on circuits I would then be considering the installation as Code 1 or 2 ("unsatisfactory" for reasons there are to many to mention here). The 50mm reason is not a failure and the regulations and they are not retrospective. Not all inspectors do an inspection with the attitude to issue an unsatisfactory report.

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now