Discuss C3s putting you in harms way ?? in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
Non-Combustible is the phrase I believe - and an example is given of steel. No idea if the BS standard for CUs says something different now, but there's no reason in principle why they couldn't find a suitable plastic or other material that was non-combustible - I just suspect it would cost more so they went with the cheapest option.Does the legislation say "Metal" or "Flame proof" or even "Flame retardant"? Haven't got my copy to hand.
Care homes and the.like ain't part of this even tho no differnece in my eyes ..
You may be over-thinking it. That bit in the Introduction says that non-compliant installations do not have to be upgraded. It does not say that existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the regulations are deemed to comply with this edition if they are not unsafe for continued use.
What has yet to be determined by a court ruling is whether the law requiring that "electrical safety standards are met" means that an existing installation has to comply with every aspect of BS 7671:2018 or only some, and if the latter, which.
A consensus seems to have emerged that it must have no non-compliances coded as C1 or C2. Superficially reasonable, if we think it reasonable to enshrine in law the can of worms which is the significantly indeterminate nature of many C2-or-C3 decisions ¹ .
But, and this is where you may be under-thinking it, there is no basis in fact for any determination based on C1/C2/C3. None whatsoever.
The lawmakers have done a truly abysmal job. Leaving aside the is-it-a-C2-or-a-C3 issue, they could have required landlords to have an EICR carried out which complied with the current edition of the Wiring Regulations (i.e. the carrying out of the EICR had to be in accordance, not the installation) and that any C1 or C2 conditions be rectified within x days and a new EICR done.
But they didn't. What they did was unbelievable, really. (Or is it, sadly, all too believable?)
They required that private landlords must ensure that the electrical safety standards are met during any period when the residential premises are occupied under a specified tenancy.
And they defined "electrical safety standards" as "the standards for electrical installations in the eighteenth edition of the Wiring Regulations, published by the Institution of Engineering and Technology and the British Standards Institution as BS 7671: 2018".
QUOTE]
From the Gov guidance document @timhoward linked to above, section 8:
Non-flame propagating would be term;Non-Combustible is the phrase I believe - and an example is given of steel. No idea if the BS standard for CUs says something different now, but there's no reason in principle why they couldn't find a suitable plastic or other material that was non-combustible - I just suspect it would cost more so they went with the cheapest option.
It would be handy to have a non-combustible AND non-conducting material for TT installations.
I don't normally berate other members but I'm sorry, get a clue. Wiring Regulations are non-statutory (not law), the statue (law) applicable to Electricians and Electrical Installations is Electricity at Work 1989.How about because the Wiring Regulations, and hence the law, do not mandate it?
Or because the fact that at the time you did the inspection plastic CUs could still be installed in offices, shops, schools, pubs, restaurants, care homes, indicated to you that plastic CUs did not need to be replaced as a matter of urgency?
Your forgetting the EICRs for rented properties are now a legal requirement. And the guidance to landlords is that the EICR ensures there properties Comply with the latest version of BS7671. An EICR was not a mandatory document. But has that changed. I will not comment yes or no because I am not a trained lawyer barrister or judge. Thats the whole point. We are only putting our personal view points on a forum. A court and there interpretation of case law is another matter entirelyNon-flame propagating would be term;
Non-flame propagating. Liable to ignite as a result of an applied flame but, after the flame is removed, does not propagate further and extinguishes itself within a limited time.
That term however applies to containment systems.
The Regulation pertaining to domestic CUs is;
421.1.201 Within domestic (household) premises, consumer units and similar switchgear assemblies shall comply with BS EN 61439-3 and shall:
(i) have their enclosure manufactured from non-combustible material, or
(ii) be enclosed in a cabinet or enclosure constructed of non-combustible material and complying with Regulation
132.12.
NOTE: Ferrous metal, e.g. steel, is deemed to be an example of a non-combustible material.
I don't normally berate other members but I'm sorry, get a clue. Wiring Regulations are non-statutory (not law), the statue (law) applicable to Electricians and Electrical Installations is Electricity at Work 1989.
If you're going to spout rubbish,please make it informed and researched rubbish, other you just look stupid.
Yes, but when you read the 18th you see that it does not contain a single standard which existing installations have to meet - it only applies to the design, erection, additions, alterations, and verification of electrical installations designed after 31st December 2018.
They aren't, strictly speaking - there's nothing in the law which makes them so. It's just that it's the way that makes the most sense. It's a bit like Part P not actually requiring work to comply with BS 7671, but the reality being it makes precious little sense to do otherwise.Your forgetting the EICRs for rented properties are now a legal requirement.
Except of course that is impossible, unless you use the special definition of "comply".And the guidance to landlords is that the EICR ensures there properties Comply with the latest version of BS7671.
Which in all probability will never happen - any landlord faced with a report he doesn't like could have the place totally rewired using russ andrews cryogenically treated cables and a gold-plated CU for less than the cost of lawyers.A court and there interpretation of case law is another matter entirely
It doesn't matter what the 18th says as it has no legal standing. The legal authority comes from the landlords having a legal obligation to have an eicr that complies with the 18th. And thats from government legislation not any edition of BS7671.Yes, but when you read the 18th you see that it does not contain a single standard which existing installations have to meet - it only applies to the design, erection, additions, alterations, and verification of electrical installations designed after 31st December 2018.
The guidance you quote doesn't change what the numpty lawyers wrote. If they even were lawyers, and not junior off-shore office clerks working self-employed for Serco.
Since you clearly disagree withIt doesn't matter what the 18th says as it has no legal standing. The legal authority comes from the landlords having a legal obligation to have an eicr that complies with the 18th. And thats from government legislation not any edition of BS7671.
perhaps you'd like to quote the part of The Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/312/contents/made which imposes a legal obligation to have an eicr that complies with the 18th.They aren't, strictly speaking - there's nothing in the law which makes them so.
And thats exactly where this thread gets a definitive answer phew ? There is a lot of information out there. But nothing in government guidelines that says Landlords EICRs or anyone else's EICRs have to legally comply with the current edition of the regulations. Just a legal requirement for landlords to have an EICR carried out every 5 years. ?Since you clearly disagree with
perhaps you'd like to quote the part of The Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/312/contents/made which imposes a legal obligation to have an eicr that complies with the 18th.
Given that the wording in the above legislation doesn't, iirc, state that the outcome MUST be satisfactory, a LL could just have an EICR undertaken to 18th edition, have it come back as unsatisfactory and yet still have met the requirements of the legislation. Surely not?And thats exactly where this thread gets a definitive answer phew ? There is a lot of information out there. But nothing in government guidelines that says Landlords EICRs or anyone else's EICRs have to legally comply with the current edition of the regulations. Just a legal requirement for landlords to have an EICR carried out every 5 years. ?
Indeed.Given that the wording in the above legislation doesn't, iirc, state that the outcome MUST be satisfactory, a LL could just have an EICR undertaken to 18th edition, have it come back as unsatisfactory and yet still have met the requirements of the legislation. Surely not?
The IET also put out other guidance in a Q+A, apparently contradicting the guidance you linked to above. The forum censors links to wiring matters, but if you put "Consumer units: a brief overview" into your search engine (quote marks included) it should come up top of the list:
The backs of boards should be sealed on reading this, and manufactures can bring new.materials to market if they prove non combustable.
Care homes and the.like ain't part of this even tho no differnece in my eyes ..
And over all they are blaming bad workmanship, but the work could of been good for 10 years prior to fire.
almost as bigb as my dossier at Police HQ., Anfield.Very interesting analysis of this ver hot topic! Above this is why it is down to the inspectors own engineering judgement on the day to an extent. As there are no real rules or legislation to cover every eventually we may come across. The electrical industry is so varied and wide that a dossier to cover all would be ridiculous in size!
Can't be, last I heard some Scouse git nicked it.....thieving bastards will take anything these days!almost as bigb as my dossier at Police HQ., Anfield.
Reply to C3s putting you in harms way ?? in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.