DICR - Split load boards in HMOs

[Andy78]

Where in BS7671 does it state the absence of additional rcd protection MUST be a Code 3 observation (see page 427) and I emphasise the word MUST, no references to third party guide books.

It doesn't. On page 427 There is guidance that says it must be given a minimum C3 (item 2, guidance for the inspector). There is also mention of the definition of all the codes including FI (items 7,8,and 9 guidance for recipient).
The definition of FI excludes it from use where an item can be fully inspected and tested within the scope and limits of the report. FI in this instance is not therefore suitable for use.
A C2 may be applied to such a situation depending on cirumstance, but not a C1 as a lack of RCD could not be construed as "danger present"

 

[richy3333]

No one is asking anyone to investigate an observation already made, read my thread. No need to keep quoting FI definitions. I personally don't care if anyone agrees or disagrees but you are another one who cannot tell me where in BS7671 it tells me it MUST go in Code 3. I stated I do not use third party guides but gave their possible uses in my thread. I have IET Guidance notes 1 to 8 which I refer to and the On Site Guide which I never refer to, it is a requirement for ECA, NICEIC membership, no idea why though.
Fortunately I was not educated at Weston Favell Upper.

Its not your thread. I think you mean your previous posts. Your questions and comments keep changing. As others have said, just stop digging.

And, no, there's no conspiracy against you, or wolves, or hate mail, or angry leprechauns...

 

[westward10]

Sorry posts, think we will have to agree to disagree on this or we will be doing this until the 18th Edition turns us all upside down again. Been interesting though and I do see all points of view on the matter.