Coding for EICR forms

[Ken77]

Hi all,

I am trying to decide on coding for 2 items, and was interested in peoples input, as whether these are acceptable, or C1,C2 or C3.

EICR form
4.3 - Condition of enclosures in terms of IP rating -
4.4 - Condition of enclosures in terms of fire rating -

With both of the above the property in question has non fire rated spots, and non ip rated shower lights. As they have been there for some time (prior to fire rated spots being a requirement) how would you code this?

Thanks

 

[flyingsparky]

I use the following rule:

C1 Immediate possibility of danger (access to live parts and such)
C2 Major deviation but not an immediate risk (No supplementary earth bonding in bathroom and no RCD protection to the circuits etc)
C3 Non compliance with regs but not a danger as such (phase identification, grommets etc)

If the I.P box is giving access to live parts its gotta be a C1, if its letting in dust, moisture etc I would go with a two.

If recessed light fititngs are incorrectly installed and creating a fire risk its defo a C1. If its not an immediate risk I would sugest a C2.

The Electrical Safety Council have the Guidance Note (4) available as a PDF download on their website. Very helpful and worth a look.

Hope this is of some help to you, good luck.


Clive

 

[Farmelectrics]

Personally code 2 for me but it's down to the individual will be interested to see what others think

 

[yellowvanman]

Isn't fire rated downlights a requirement when there is another dwelling above? In the same house i don't think its a requirement, although I put them in all the time!

How would you rate the IP rating of the downlights? In theory they only have to be IPx4 - splash resistant!

 

[Ken77]

Out of interest why have you two both recommended a C1 or C2? I am curious because, surely whether the lights are fire rated or not relates to building regs, and if these have been installed prior to Part P coming into force (and with regs not being retrospective) how could you fail it? I was leaning towards C3 myself.

You wouldn't fall an installation for a 6mm earth if you could prove it was safe using adiabatic equation? And you wouldn't fail an older installation just because it did not have RCD protection on it, as required by current regs.

 

[yellowvanman]

You wouldn't fall an installation for a 6mm earth if you could prove it was safe using adiabatic equation? And you wouldn't fail an older installation just because it did not have RCD protection on it, as required by current regs.

Some would!

 

[flyingsparky]

No one said it was a recessed light fitting..... but out of interest, is it?

The ESC best practice guide suggests that regardless of building regs, or what room the fitting is in, if its incorrectly installed and is an immediate fire risk it should be a C1.

I wouldn't fail an installation just because of a 6.0mm earth, in fact we did an EICR today that had one. Provided I can prove by calculation that the cable size will cope with any fault current etc I would let it go. I would always however, make a note that it didn't comply. There is a big difference between non compliance and unsafe.

As with everything inside the BGB its down to our own interpretation of the regs though.

 

[Farmelectrics]

Ok code 3 maybe code 2 is bait unfair but just goes to show how different we can all determine these codes more a think about code3 does seem better but might have won job changing spots lol

 

[flyingsparky]

Sorry!!! Missed the bottom two lines of the original question. My bad.

If there is not a habitable room upstairs there is no requirement for fire rated. If the fittings in the bathroom are not i.p rated and there is no RCD protection on the circuit then I would class the lights and a C3 and the lack of RCD as a C2 (unless supp bonding is present and adequate.

 

[Ken77]

Thanks for all input, and its helpful to see how people interpret regs.

 

[telectrix]

and check ceiling height. i9f more than 7' 6" then the downlights are out of zone.