NAPIT Guidance on New Electrical Certification requirements

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stew
    replied
    baldelectrician

    many thanks for posting that PDF link on the other thread it really sheds light on what is/isn't allowed in terms of ECGR ratings, very helpful, I will use that as a reference to share and discuss with any electricians. I had been searching high and low to find in more detail real examples of the ratings that could for instance be given to older CU's.

    JK0 while I'm not an electrician that guide posted suggests that your ECGR results are wrong,,, I say suggests as it's hard without seeing the install and speaking to the electrician what was in his/her mind when you got the C2 for the older CU. For instance the board could be damaged. But definately worth taking more advice before spending out I think

    All just my personal view

    Leave a comment:


  • baldelectrician
    replied
    C1- Immediately dangerous
    C2- Potentially dangerous
    C3- Not to current standards

    The old regs required summlimentary bonding (bond cable from heating pipe > lighting circuit > shower circuit ...), in other words the items in the bathroom that could become live in the event of a fault were connected by local supplimentary bonding and therefore at the same 'potential' .
    You only get a shock of there is a difference of potential

    The last regs let you omit supplimentary bonding if RCD's were present for all items in the bathroom.

    https://www.electricalsafetyfirst.or...149/bpg4-1.pdf

    See page 12 - top right side

    Leave a comment:


  • Diversity
    replied
    Originally posted by Stew View Post


    So as far as I understand these are not new regulations and are an extension of the previous regulations being applied to HMO's (with some differences) , in that regard there must be plently of HMO's that were certified with C3's.
    Sorry but what does C1, C2 and C3 refer to?

    Leave a comment:


  • Stew
    replied
    Also if I look at page 17 in the guide it states as not even needing a notifiable code;

    "Consumer units having rewireable fuses can continue to provide satisfactory service (Cover removed for illustrative purposes)"

    Leave a comment:


  • Stew
    replied
    Just to add when I look at the guide posted by an electrician in the other thread it mentions

    Circuits with ineffective overcurrent protection (due, for example, to oversized fuse wire in rewireable fuses)

    Which adds to my belief that for example old CU's with rewireable fuses are still allowed and deemed safe (not a C1 or C2) otherwise the above makes no sense.

    I would be raising questions with the government and with the certification body if I were yourself and speak to another contractor..

    Looking at the guide an electrican posted - https://www.electricalsafetyfirst.or...-4-issue-4.pdf

    pages 15/16 suggest older plastic CU or even one with rewireable fuses is C3,,,, C2 may be given if no supp bonding etc etc unless I've read it wrong, I only skimmed it.

    Would be ineteresting to see a picture of your install CU etc if you have one

    Just my personal view

    All the best Stew.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stew
    replied
    Originally posted by JK0 View Post
    I thought you guys might be interested to see the EICR I received today. You may notice the C2 listed for the consumer unit presumably because it isn't metal.docu0024.jpg
    If that were me I'd be getting it clarified as in the very detailed safety first PDF it shows an old rewireable CU being fine except for it being mentioned that it was missing a fuse carrier (on the other thread)

    The contractor may have failed yours because of unsafe connections in the board and maybe not the board itself.

    If I look at the regs as they stand there is nothing that says it must comply with the current 18th regs.

    I personally fear this whole lot is a minefield going forwards, it depends on the experience of your electrician and how they ineterpret the regs.

    I think a lot of these things will be clarified soon as regs that are not regulated are pretty ineffective.....

    is the ECGR passed yet by parliament, I thought it was up for review but not signed yet?

    Just my personal view.

    Leave a comment:


  • JK0
    replied
    I thought you guys might be interested to see the EICR I received today. You may notice the C2 listed for the consumer unit presumably because it isn't metal.docu0024.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • Stew
    replied
    So as far as I understand these are not new regulations and are an extension of the previous regulations being applied to HMO's (with some differences) , in that regard there must be plently of HMO's that were certified with C3's.

    I think a judge would have to apply common sense as to the intent of the regulations and in my untrained view that would be that the installation was safe and compliant. If a court were to suggest an upgrade to 18th Regs was required this would make new case law in terms of building control also. So any construction carried out in rental properties years back that did not now comply with new thermal regs and such would also need to be upgraded. Applying regs retrospectively always seems impossible to implement.

    I would consider it madness if 18th regs or one level of the regs were mandatory as next year or the year after a new set of regs might come out, would that mean that all the electrical certs were void and all the installations need to be updated...

    Just my personal view

    Leave a comment:


  • MdeB
    replied
    Originally posted by Stew View Post

    From my reading it does not need to comply with 18th regs, just the regs at the point the current equipment was fitted.

    There was a question and a clarification provided on the odpm website as far as I remember
    Yes, but the issue is
    • Will a court decide that the regulations say is what the government thinks they say?
    It is very easy for organisations to give their view when it is not them that would be in court if a legal representative of a tenant thinks "comply with" means "is to the standard for new installations in".
    I could see Shelter supporting such a case.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stew
    replied
    Originally posted by Diversity View Post

    Hello, could you break down what the £1K costs are. thanks in advance
    Here is the part - BS7671:2018 Requirements for Electrical Installations was issued on 31st July 2018 and is intended to come in to force on 1st January 2019. Installations installed after 31st December 2018 are to comply with BS7671:2018.

    The Regulations apply to the design, erection and verification of electrical installations, also additions and alterations to existing installations. Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading.”

    So you may get a C3 or similar for not having a metal consumer unit but this won't fail the test

    The trick I think will be making sure that any trade you employ understands the regs

    Just my own personal view take advice before you act

    All the best Stew.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stew
    replied
    MdeB,

    From my reading it does not need to comply with 18th regs, just the regs at the point the current equipment was fitted.

    There was a question and a clarification provided on the odpm website as far as I remember

    Leave a comment:


  • JK0
    replied
    Originally posted by Diversity View Post

    Hello, could you break down what the £1K costs are. thanks in advance
    It's just the cost of a metal consumer unit, the things that go in it and the labour for replacing it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Diversity
    replied
    Originally posted by JK0 View Post
    I've come to the conclusion that it will be simpler all round if I just get all properties upgraded to 2018 spec as far as possible, to avoid argument, and repeat attendances.

    Pricey, (£1k per flat) so far, but I honestly believe there is little option. Tax man will be hard up next year!
    Hello, could you break down what the £1K costs are. thanks in advance

    Leave a comment:


  • ATC
    replied
    I thought the guide useful and have been distributing it to private landlords in blocks my firm manages

    Leave a comment:


  • cymro123
    replied
    NAPIT seem to have an interesting interpretation of the law I wonder if the person who wrote this actually read the legislation?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Activity

Collapse

Working...
X