- Reaction score
- 3,011
I wonder if this sparks that is getting ripped apart is forum member .............. I bet he now knows what the Christians felt like 2500 years ago, if he is.
Search the forum,
E
From what i have learned on these forums, It's just this type of situation that all the sparks here are complaining about, and is giving the industry a bad name in the process.
E
P.SMITH from Norwich, Norfolk area anyone????
D
P
E
W
Discuss Comments advice on report after having Electrical inspection in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
OP
Engineer54
Thing is Malc, he has made far too many mistakes on those 2 PIRs!! (If they are just mistakes) What do you do, just ignore these points, and let the OP fend for himself?? Or do we give the OP the information he needs to get his installation rectified correctly and safely at a reasonably cost effective price??
From what i have learned on these forums, It's just this type of situation that all the sparks here are complaining about, and is giving the industry a bad name in the process.
OP
Electricalserv
P.SMITH from Norwich, Norfolk area anyone????
- Reaction score
- 67,285
talking of which, malcolm. when's the next crucifixion/beheading in saudi?
OP
drew35
I noticed that also, a reading that low on an earth rod? That can't be right.
- Reaction score
- 3,011
Well mate i'm assuming he is not or if he is then he is keeping quiet. I agree we should be telling the OP that the report on face value is sub standard and advising the OP to contact the electrician, and to let the electrician have a chance to address his mistakes/errors. This is what a scheme would advise.
I just feel that kangaroo courts are counter productive. This thread as opened what seems to be a very emotive subject, and that is the reason I have not posted on it, but always feel that sometimes things are not always what they seem, until the truth will out.
I just feel that kangaroo courts are counter productive. This thread as opened what seems to be a very emotive subject, and that is the reason I have not posted on it, but always feel that sometimes things are not always what they seem, until the truth will out.
OP
PC Electrics
The inconvenience thing is an issue, but this is a modest property and there are many alternative sources of light in the normal domestic situation, eg TV, bedside lights, clock display, oven light, moon light, street lights. I don't see it as critical that the property is rewired to have 2 lights circuits, though of course you can if you want to spend the money.
The lack of cpc is an issue of safety however and really needs rectifying. Given the age of the property it is likely that the lights are wired in singles. there are probably red singles looping in and out of each switch, a switch wire to each light position and a neutral looping round each light position. i would offer to fix this by replacing the single neutral with a new single & earth neutral and then just replacing each switch wire again with single & earth. No need for a complete rewire - job done in a day and cpc to all points. Remember this is a bungalow.
So you now tell us there is an immersion connected to the ring? Why is this not detailed on the PIR and given a code 4 (arguably a code 2 since there is only one ring, especially if this is your primary means of hot water)?
this needs fixing with it's own circuit. Probably less than half a day. If he was intending to do this, it really should be detailed on the PIR and quote.
At this age of property, it's also likely the immersion has no safety cut out - this is a code 2 and a new stat should be fitted (see the guides linked below)
If I were putting in a new dRCD Cu, I'd be tempted to split the ring into 2x radials at 20A each, one for the kitchen and one for the rest of the house.
The cables need properly identifying - given the age they are almost certainly imperial. I've attached a doc that gives you details about how to identify imperial cable and rate them around page 5 or 6 of this thread. If it's been deleted by 'the management', PM me and I'll send you a copy by email.
No mention in the report of supplementary bonding for the bathroom. Again given the age likely to be an issue, but a dRCD CU will sort that.
Also, why does the PIR not detail any 'extent' - it cannot be not applicable.
I've personally had a lot of trouble with Crabtree branded RCDs and RCBOs and won't fit them new, only if an existing CU is Crabtree. And that Electrium recall seriously dented my faith in any of their brands. IMO Hager are much better quality since they were redesigned (and better value and made in the EU & assembled in the UK).
The sparks should check out guides 1, 4 and 6 here:
Best practice guides : Electrical Safety Council
more advice for the spark:
Periodic inspection of existing domestic and similar installations : Electrical Safety Council
plenty of advice for the client here:
Home Electrics : Electrical Safety Council
The lack of cpc is an issue of safety however and really needs rectifying. Given the age of the property it is likely that the lights are wired in singles. there are probably red singles looping in and out of each switch, a switch wire to each light position and a neutral looping round each light position. i would offer to fix this by replacing the single neutral with a new single & earth neutral and then just replacing each switch wire again with single & earth. No need for a complete rewire - job done in a day and cpc to all points. Remember this is a bungalow.
So you now tell us there is an immersion connected to the ring? Why is this not detailed on the PIR and given a code 4 (arguably a code 2 since there is only one ring, especially if this is your primary means of hot water)?
this needs fixing with it's own circuit. Probably less than half a day. If he was intending to do this, it really should be detailed on the PIR and quote.
At this age of property, it's also likely the immersion has no safety cut out - this is a code 2 and a new stat should be fitted (see the guides linked below)
If I were putting in a new dRCD Cu, I'd be tempted to split the ring into 2x radials at 20A each, one for the kitchen and one for the rest of the house.
The cables need properly identifying - given the age they are almost certainly imperial. I've attached a doc that gives you details about how to identify imperial cable and rate them around page 5 or 6 of this thread. If it's been deleted by 'the management', PM me and I'll send you a copy by email.
No mention in the report of supplementary bonding for the bathroom. Again given the age likely to be an issue, but a dRCD CU will sort that.
Also, why does the PIR not detail any 'extent' - it cannot be not applicable.
I've personally had a lot of trouble with Crabtree branded RCDs and RCBOs and won't fit them new, only if an existing CU is Crabtree. And that Electrium recall seriously dented my faith in any of their brands. IMO Hager are much better quality since they were redesigned (and better value and made in the EU & assembled in the UK).
The sparks should check out guides 1, 4 and 6 here:
Best practice guides : Electrical Safety Council
more advice for the spark:
Periodic inspection of existing domestic and similar installations : Electrical Safety Council
plenty of advice for the client here:
Home Electrics : Electrical Safety Council
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
Engineer54
Malcolm,
I most certainly agree with some of your points, i'm not into Kangaroo court scenarios either. Just that Both of those PIRs had the the same anomalies, especially those Zs results, ....That's more than a little suspicious don't you think??
Not really interested in the other area's where simple typo mistakes may or may not have been made, they are neither here or there.
The Codes given in these PIRs are again out of my experience, as i can't state with any authority what code should be given to what infraction... Others here would know far better than I in this instance!!! That seems to be a more than a common occurance from what i can understand....
I most certainly agree with some of your points, i'm not into Kangaroo court scenarios either. Just that Both of those PIRs had the the same anomalies, especially those Zs results, ....That's more than a little suspicious don't you think??
Not really interested in the other area's where simple typo mistakes may or may not have been made, they are neither here or there.
The Codes given in these PIRs are again out of my experience, as i can't state with any authority what code should be given to what infraction... Others here would know far better than I in this instance!!! That seems to be a more than a common occurance from what i can understand....
OP
wingers
thank you all for some great advice - really wasn't intended to be a witch hunt against electrician that did the report - just when I posted my initial issues re a light socket it was suggested I post the report to get some guidance - I certainly have nothing against the electrician I used, just trying to make sure job is done correctly at best price - have only just bought this bungalow so money a bit tight etc
Reply to Comments advice on report after having Electrical inspection in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
Similar Threads
OFFICIAL SPONSORS
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
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.