EICR - PLASTIC CONSUMER UNIT CODE C2 or C3

[Octopus]

The cupboard below the stairs is not the route.

But the stairs are ........... and if the fuseboard is on fire, then so is the escape route!

 

[Nigel]

Regulations cannot be applied retrospectively or we would all millionaires note it, underline it, do it in red and wtf has stairs got to do with it,

you inspect to the current Standards.

I agree stairs have nothing to do with it.

 

[westward10]

But the cupboards holding up the stairs.

The stairs hold themself up, the cupboard is merely the space below.

 

[Midwest]

The stairs hold themself up, the cupboard is merely the space below.

Good point, well made.

Some stairs keep the cupboard up though

 

[Midwest]

I agree stairs have nothing to do with it.

Some of the committee members, seem to have an alternate opinion, it would seem.

 

[johnduffell]

Think this link might convince you partly of Murdoch's argument;
Hager Teams up With Pro Electrician to “Mythbreak” Amendment 3 - http://professional-electrician.com/features/hager-teams-pro-electrician-mythbust-amendment-3/

Interesting but it contradicts itself, it says plastic should be coded c3 under the stairs ie improvement recommended, however later in the same page it says that plastic consumer unit do not need changing. So they can't make their mind up.
It also says you can't use non conductive cus for tt supplies which is clearly very backwards. It's not the insulated cu that's a problem it's the fire performance. To explain it that way round is misleading at best.

 

[Toneyz]

The above is clear to me. Once the plastic was a hard bakelite type I remember the likes of Crabtree and MEM (Eaton as it is now) then changed to ABS plastic never used to hear of consumer unit fires it is down to poor workmanship of loose connections and also not rechecking factory connections. All of a sudden there is a push to use the torque screwdriver.

 

[Andy78]

Interesting but it contradicts itself, it says plastic should be coded c3 under the stairs ie improvement recommended, however later in the same page it says that plastic consumer unit do not need changing. So they can't make their mind up.
It also says you can't use non conductive cus for tt supplies which is clearly very backwards. It's not the insulated cu that's a problem it's the fire performance. To explain it that way round is misleading at best.

No contradiction that I can see.

Plastic consumer units do not need changing as the regulations are not retrospective. This is explained in the introduction to BS7671.

A C3 means that the issue does not conform to the current regulations and could be improved in terms of safety. It does not mean an issue must be rectified or altered.

 

[johnduffell]

Fair enough I can see the sense there, it's always recommended to comply with the latest regs even if there's nothing wrong with the previous.

Regarding the metal CUs with a TT supply, I notice network rail found a similar issue. Perhaps we should approach all TT CUs where a fault has been reported with a volt stick! Or better still have double insulated CUs. http://www.tracksafetyalliance.co.uk/storage/documents/Safety Bulletin NRB 17_07 - Test before touch while fault finding.pdf

 

[Andy78]

Fair enough I can see the sense there, it's always recommended to comply with the latest regs even if there's nothing wrong with the previous.

It is most certainly not always recommended to comply with latest regs if there is nothing wrong with the previous install. That's what the introduction to the regs explicitly states.
All guidance and training related to periodic inspection teaches this also.

The only recommendations that should be put forward are recommendations related to safety, not just strict compliance. For instance nobody would suggest a rewire just because pre harmonisation coloured cables were in use. Well, some decorators I have met would say that actually but, well you see what I mean.