Search the forum,

Discuss Blanks missing from CU in 2 senarios in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

MG201

-
Reaction score
103
If there is blanks missing from a CU what code would this be.
Scenario 1 .. 6 blanks missing from a CU in a corridor cupboard
Scenario 2 8 blanks missing from a locked corridor cupboard

Looking at 3 diffrent reports they have same faults but have been coded differently.
 
Coding should be your personal opinion, there is nothing official in black and white to say what Code this should be.

Blooming well should be. In or out of a locked cupboard, the code should be the same ( edit for that particular situation). How many other variables apply.
 
Last edited:
I thought so. Just 1 report says 2 for locked cupboard AND 1 for the other 1s noy in locked location .i found it strange. Maybe if only 1 missing but not that amoumt.Don't know why he put that as he put a 1 for the rest. It's been changed now though . .as for the coding i see it as effecting the IP RATING . .would yous say thats a fair rate .£2 per blank amd 30min per board
 
I didn't say about variables. Coding is a personal judgement.

As you may know westward, I don't do EICR's (or have done a suitable course). I do find it strange that coding, is left to the personnel opinion of the inspector. I understand that no one situation can be the same, but I don't really understand, how one inspector can code something one way, and another one might code it another, when something is exactly the same.
 
As you may know westward, I don't do EICR's (or have done a suitable course). I do find it strange that coding, is left to the personnel opinion of the inspector. I understand that no one situation can be the same, but I don't really understand, how one inspector can code something one way, and another one might code it another, when something is exactly the same.
And like this time the same guy codes the same problem diffrent due to location
 
Does this mean that if there is masses of grommets missing that should be a code 1 .. just asking out of curiosity .also does it make a diffrence if only 1 or 2 blanks are missing or is it just the rule of thumb that it's always a C1..
 
Any opinion on the rates offered. There is aprox 27 boards all with various amounts of blanks missing . All within a 10 min walikng distance . Eg 10 min from first to last. Not 10 min from 1 to the next
 
I personally think a C1 is a bit extreme.
Is a c1 fair when there is mass amounts missing . I recon on this job it's the case of if its a C1 for 1 of the CUs then it's a C1 for them all locked location or not . Like previously said by other dont know who will access the local. .
 
Does this mean that if there is masses of grommets missing that should be a code 1 .. just asking out of curiosity .also does it make a diffrence if only 1 or 2 blanks are missing or is it just the rule of thumb that it's always a C1..
Gromits missing not quite the same as blanks. It depends if you can get your finger in the hole and it could touch live parts. Then it would be a C1.

If your concerned about ingress or protection of cables on entry then probably C3 maybe C2 depending on other factors.
 
I have to say that the code should be based on the scenario. C1 is immediately dangerous. So if in normal circumstances that panel cannot be accessed by anyone but a skilled person then it can be a C2.

My gut feeling on an EICR is if you have some blanks in your van that will fit then fit them and don't even record it as a code.
 
Generally I would a C1 in a general area and a C2 in a cupboard with controlled access. It does really depend on how that access is managed. At the larger station I work on electric cupboards and switch room keys are very tightly controlled.
 
Generally I would a C1 in a general area and a C2 in a cupboard with controlled access. It does really depend on how that access is managed. At the larger station I work on electric cupboards and switch room keys are very tightly controlled.
Why does the skilled person matter? You have potential exposed live parts.
 
Why discuss what code for having a blank missing:rolleyes:
There is no such specific problem as a missing blank and it is nigh on impossible to group each situation and set a universal code

The judgement should be made on accessibility to live parts without the use of a tool,if they can be accessed the code is different to non accessed (whether blanks exist or don't exist,they are in themselves irrelevant)
 
I personally think a C1 is a bit extreme.

Hit, nail and head spring to mind

C1 if at a low level and you can see the copper
C2 if at a high level and if you can see copper

BUT ifs it when doing an EICR, I would probably get one out of the van and fit it ............ unless the installation is a pile of poo!
 
Bring back the old Category 1 to 4 system I say as Code 1 and 2 are far too similar in meaning. Is a missing blank a Code 1 (Danger present) or Code 2 (Potentially dangerous). A blank missing is a potential danger in my eyes as there is potential to cause harm. What does danger present represent exactly.
 
A Code 1 (C1) observation means ‘Danger present, risk of injury, Immediate remedial action required.’ It is an immediate threat and should be rectified or made safe as soon as possible. An example of a C1 defect would be accessible live conductors due to damage, poorly modified enclosures or removed maintenance panels. Incorrect polarity would also attract a code C1 as it may allow conductive parts, not normally expected to be live, to become live.

The presence of a code C1 warrants immediate action to be taken which would be to inform the duty holder or responsible person for the installation immediately, both verbally and in writing, of the risk of injury that exists.

A Code 2 (C2) is a potentially dangerous defect, these might be things that don’t pose an immediate threat but are likely to become a danger in the future. A C2 is described as ‘Potentially dangerous – urgent remedial action required.’

The phrase “potentially dangerous”, in the C2 code is designed to point towards a risk of injury from contact with live parts after a sequence of events. A sequence of events could mean that an individual may gain access to live parts through a day to day task that would not be expected to give access to live parts.

An observation code FI is described as ‘Further investigation required without delay.’ This means that your electrical contractor has observed something whilst carrying out the testing for instance emergency lights seem very dim. This might not have been covered in the report so they have noted it separately as code FI.

Codes C1 and C2 attract unsatisfactory report findings and you’ll have to have these defects rectified in order to prove compliance. A report could also be classed as unsatisfactory if the only fault codes are FI. An example would be when there are lots of circuits that are not verified at the time of testing, this is because the inspector would not be able to categorically say that these circuits are safe or not.

Code 3 is described as ‘Improvement recommended.’ This means it does not comply with the regulations but isn’t actually dangerous. A code C3 should imply that the installation is not necessarily dangerous but it may not comply with the current version of the regulations or for example, may have damaged fittings that do not have exposed live parts. A code C3, in itself, should not warrant an overall unsatisfactory report.

You will need to address C1, C2 and FI faults on your report in order to achieve compliance. Once faults have been rectified and your electrician has issued you with the relevant paperwork, Electrical Installation Certificate (EIC) or Minor Works Certificate (MW) these should be kept together with the EICR to prove all faults have been rectified in accordance with BS7671.
 
I personally think every scenario is different.
Accessibility comes into it in my opinion.
For instance today I had a fused spur in the loft area supplying the tv amplifier for a small block of flats , cover not screwed back so exposed live parts.
Normally I would c1 this however the loft area is only accessible by step ladders ( non fitted internally) and the loft cover can only be opened by a hex key.
I did not c1 this in this scenario.
 
If there is blanks missing from a CU what code would this be.
Scenario 1 .. 6 blanks missing from a CU in a corridor cupboard
Scenario 2 8 blanks missing from a locked corridor cupboard

Looking at 3 diffrent reports they have same faults but have been coded differently.

If the report(s) contained any C1's, shouldn't they have had the necessary remedial action taken immediately?
 
I personally think every scenario is different.
Accessibility comes into it in my opinion.
For instance today I had a fused spur in the loft area supplying the tv amplifier for a small block of flats , cover not screwed back so exposed live parts.
Normally I would c1 this however the loft area is only accessible by step ladders ( non fitted internally) and the loft cover can only be opened by a hex key.
I did not c1 this in this scenario.
Risk assessment, method statement...…..and screw the cover back....? ;)
 
I personally think every scenario is different.
Accessibility comes into it in my opinion.
For instance today I had a fused spur in the loft area supplying the tv amplifier for a small block of flats , cover not screwed back so exposed live parts.
Normally I would c1 this however the loft area is only accessible by step ladders ( non fitted internally) and the loft cover can only be opened by a hex key.
I did not c1 this in this scenario.
I would have screwed it back on.
 
Risk assessment, method statement...…..and screw the cover back....? ;)
Enclosure had the threads missing from the plastic back box or I’d have just fixed it back.
Presumably it’s been like that from day 1 and nobody could be arsed to change the surface box so left it.
Building was built around 2004/5 as it’s brown/blue coloured wiring but the consumer units are split load 16th edition stranded
 
Risk assessment, method statement...…..and screw the cover back....? ;)
Enclosure had the threads missing from the plastic back box or I’d have just fixed it back.
Presumably it’s been like that from day 1 and nobody could be arsed to change the surface box so left it.
Building was built around 2004/5 as it’s brown/blue coloured wiring but the consumer units are split load 16th edition stranded so will have been like that since installed
 

Reply to Blanks missing from CU in 2 senarios in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

Similar Threads

I'm practising EICRs on friendly locations as I'm still in training - technically done my 2391-52 but frankly need loads more practise. I've just...
Replies
11
Views
949
I have been asked to look at this report as the customer has been given (in their words) 'A very high quote plus VAT'. It doesn't look well...
Replies
5
Views
674
Hi, I am looking to convert a 2 way light into just control by single switch. I have searched and looked for similar questions here, and found a...
Replies
4
Views
1K
Evening everyone . Currently looking at pricing a job up . It’s a hot tub supply . Outside socket with a few spare ways in an outdoor cu . 10mm...
Replies
7
Views
706
In preparation for an EVSE installation, I am running the supply cable from the main CU, via catenary, to a new CU in my garage. The cable is 6mm...
Replies
4
Views
199

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

YOUR Unread Posts

This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top