EICR unsatisfactory due to 'no RCD protection to lighting circuits'

Discuss EICR unsatisfactory due to 'no RCD protection to lighting circuits' in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

H

herbiehowler

DIY
Reaction score
7
Hello everyone
I have a 1996 2 bedroom house which I'm about to let out as I lost my job due to COVID and need to relocate.
The NICEIC electrician I used for my EICR has given me a code C2 for 'no RCD protection to lighting circuits including bathroom lighting'. To put this right, he's proposing a new Consumer Unit, for about £450.
Would like some advice - should I query this given that the house was built in 1996, and came up to standard at the time?
Thanks
 
Lighting circuit without RCD protection does not constitute a C2.
C3 only.

There is no debate on that.

are there any other comments on the lighting circuit? what is the actual wording?

i did a flat the other day that had no RCD protection, as it was a re wireable board.

it came back as satisfactory. I have to admit I was surprised, but the fact dictated the outcome.
 
Thanks guys. Other C2 codes on the report:
1. "Signs of thermal damage to Consumer unit and MCB's due to a door bell transformer within the CU over heating" Remedial work: "Install separate housing for doorbell transformer to stop thermal damage - £75.00 + VAT".
2. "Bathroom light not IP rated" Remedial work: "Replace bathroom light with IP rated fitting" - £50 + VAT"
If having no RCD protection for lighting doesn't justify a new Consumer Unit, does point 1 merit it?
 
Can’t comment on the thermal damage as I cant see it. Photo would help.

IP rated bathroom light.

A common mistake among some sparkies.
if it’s above=2.25M it does not need to have a water resistant fitting. A normal pendant is fine.

i would advise getting a bathroom IP rated light, but would not code it if it’s above that 2.25M.
get your tape measure out.
 
Paignton pete said:
A common mistake among some sparkies.
if it’s above=2.25M it does not need to have a water resistant fitting. A normal pendant is fine.
Click to expand...
Pendant light? With most ceilings being around 2.4m, that's going to be a very short drop in most cases.
A batten holder might keeps things high enough, or a gallery fitting of some sort, but agree that IP44 or greater is preferable.
Always considered it strange that the 2.25m is measured from the floor, even over a bath. I've seen baths fitted with legs fully extended and the legs on wooden blocks to help with drainage problems.
 
herbiehowler said:
Did I mention that the electrician who signed the report wasn't the electrician who did the inspection? Is that legal?
Click to expand...
That doesn’t sound right, but they may have a reason.

I’m sure it explains it on the EICR, but the codes are thus;

C1 - immediate danger. Bare live wires, or sockets hanging off he wall... anything that any sane electrician would just turn the power off.

C2 - potentially dangerous. Something that isn’t C1 but close. The overheating bell transformer, for example. Although without seeing it, we don’t know it’s severity. (Has been known for dodgy tradesmen to melt plastics with a lighter to show “overheating damage“)

C1 - Improvement recommended. Not dangerous, and overall satisfactory. As mentioned above, an old Fusebox with rewirables can be satisfactory.

Was this EICR done because estate agent asked for it? Every house I’ve bought hasn’t had it done.
 
If there is no RCD protection does the bathroom have supplementary bonding installed?

Theres not necessarily anything 'odd' about the electrician inspecting and someone else signing the report off. One could be the inspector and the other possibly the QS?
 
brianmoooore said:
Pendant light? With most ceilings being around 2.4m, that's going to be a very short drop in most cases.
A batten holder might keeps things high enough, or a gallery fitting of some sort, but agree that IP44 or greater is preferable.
Always considered it strange that the 2.25m is measured from the floor, even over a bath. I've seen baths fitted with legs fully extended and the legs on wooden blocks to help with drainage problems.
Click to expand...
Depends on the location of the (Pendant) doesn’t it when your standing in the bath with a shower then ceiling height is reduced and especially if the pendant is within arms reach. All bathrooms without suitably IP rated light should be rcd protected in my opinion if they aren’t they C2 if they do have suitable IP rated light without rcd protection then C3. Easy to resolve isn’t it don’t have a pendant/batten holder in bathroom simple
 
Paignton pete said:
Can’t comment on the thermal damage as I cant see it. Photo would help.

IP rated bathroom light.

A common mistake among some sparkies.
if it’s above=2.25M it does not need to have a water resistant fitting. A normal pendant is fine.

i would advise getting a bathroom IP rated light, but would not code it if it’s above that 2.25M.
get your tape measure out.
Click to expand...
I thought a batten fitting is acceptable
 
Thanks everyone for your comments. The outcome:
I asked the report writer to change 'no RCD protection to lighting circuits' from C2 to C3. Not having heard back, I went down the route of sending the report as it stood, plus photos, to 3 other trusted electricians, and getting quotes for remedial work. One of these suggested using RCBOs instead of replacing the CU. Have gone with him because I'm saving hundreds of pounds. Today the original writer got back to me. Gave me a quote for using RCBOs (much higher than other quote) Then he said he'd change the C2 to C3. Declined because by then I'd had enough hassle, and lost my patience....
 
Grant1987 said:
Depends on the location of the (Pendant) doesn’t it when your standing in the bath with a shower then ceiling height is reduced and especially if the pendant is within arms reach. All bathrooms without suitably IP rated light should be rcd protected in my opinion if they aren’t they C2 if they do have suitable IP rated light without rcd protection then C3. Easy to resolve isn’t it don’t have a pendant/batten holder in bathroom
Click to expand...
Curiously, it doesn't the 2.25m measurement is still from the floor, even if the lamp is diretly over the (raised) bath. Ridiculous, but that's what the regs say.
 
brianmoooore said:
Curiously, it doesn't the 2.25m measurement is still from the floor, even if the lamp is diretly over the (raised) bath. Ridiculous, but that's what the regs say.
Click to expand...
Yea I agree is ridiculous I just change existing light fitting to suitably ip rated one is easy to do with little extra £££ so don’t see the need to be lazy and not change It.
 
The old reg. said must be not in reach of a person in a bath or shower*. This would exclude a non IP rated light over a raised bath.

* This reminded me of one of the funniest things I've ever witnessed. A electricity board inspector, who had a personal feud with the householder, was inspecting my new installation. I had place an immersion heater switch outside of the airing cupboard in a very large bathroom. Bath position had been revised after I'd done the electrics, and the sight of this overweight character balancing in the bath, desperately trying to prove this switch was within reach, had to be seen to be believed.
 
brianmoooore said:
The old reg. said must be not in reach of a person in a bath or shower*. This would exclude a non IP rated light over a raised bath.

* This reminded me of one of the funniest things I've ever witnessed. A electricity board inspector, who had a personal feud with the householder, was inspecting my new installation. I had place an immersion heater switch outside of the airing cupboard in a very large bathroom. Bath position had been revised after I'd done the electrics, and the sight of this overweight character balancing in the bath, desperately trying to prove this switch was within reach, had to be seen to be believed.
Click to expand...
?
 
The property was a 'time warp' large farmhouse, which was sold at auction. The boss man of the local electricity board and my customer were the last two bidders, and my customer outbid him, so when it came to connect up to the mains supply (place had a small generator only), he came out in person to do the checks.
Only thing he found 'wrong' in the end, was that I had used the earthing stud on the side of a large ironclad generator change over switch to join some bonding wires together, instead of a separate service block or MET.
 
brianmoooore said:
The property was a 'time warp' large farmhouse, which was sold at auction. The boss man of the local electricity board and my customer were the last two bidders, and my customer outbid him, so when it came to connect up to the mains supply (place had a small generator only), he came out in person to do the checks.
Only thing he found 'wrong' in the end, was that I had used the earthing stud on the side of a large ironclad generator change over switch to join some bonding wires together, instead of a separate service block or MET.
Click to expand...
Nice to hear stories like that Brian, Although you are definitely old school with the wording of “Electricity Board” they havnt changed much these days just less competent ?
 
Things were much simpler in those days.
SWEB installed the supply, SWEB fitted the meter, SWEB did some very basic testing, SWEB energised the supply, SWEB turned up every three months to read the meter, and SWEB sent you your electricity bill.
 
brianmoooore said:
Things were much simpler in those days.
SWEB installed the supply, SWEB fitted the meter, SWEB did some very basic testing, SWEB energised the supply, SWEB turned up every three months to read the meter, and SWEB sent you your electricity bill.
Click to expand...
Yea I bet is too many ppl sticking their dirty fingers in the pie these days isn’t it
 
Hello - sorry to resurrect old thread but it seems to be along the lines of my issue.

I am a landlord with old Volex CU which only has RCD on sockets - EICR inspection has C2's it as no RCD on lighting circuit but reading this thread and spekaing to my usual electrician from London, it would seem it could be a C3 - can anyone advise me please?

Many thanks

Bradley
 
Is the person who did this EICR a member of NAPIT?
NAPIT produce a "codebreakers" booklet, based on nothing other than their own ideas, which suggest C2 instead of C3 for lighting circuits with no RCD.
An EICR is based on the contents of the 18th edition of BS7671, produced by the IET, not the spurious recommendations of trade organisations such as NAPIT or the NICEIC, and the lack of a RCD in a lighting circuit, that was installed correctly at a time when BS7671 didn't require a RCD, is coded as C3, not C2.
This doesn't mean that I consider it acceptable to have any domestic circuit not protected by a RCD, and although I would code it as C3, I would strongly recommend the provision of RCDs in the notes accompanying the EICR.
A similar argument applies to lighting circuits that do not have a cpc.
 
braddersman said:
Hello - sorry to resurrect old thread but it seems to be along the lines of my issue.

I am a landlord with old Volex CU which only has RCD on sockets - EICR inspection has C2's it as no RCD on lighting circuit but reading this thread and spekaing to my usual electrician from London, it would seem it could be a C3 - can anyone advise me please?

Many thanks

Bradley
Click to expand...
What is the exact wording on the report?

it does make a difference. Also when was the lighting circuit installed. And have any alterations been done to the lighting circuit in the last 3 years.
 
braddersman said:
Hello - sorry to resurrect old thread but it seems to be along the lines of my issue.

I am a landlord with old Volex CU which only has RCD on sockets - EICR inspection has C2's it as no RCD on lighting circuit but reading this thread and spekaing to my usual electrician from London, it would seem it could be a C3 - can anyone advise me please?

Many thanks

Bradley
Click to expand...
C2 is perfectly justified in this situation. Its down to the person who is signing the certificate whether to c2 or c3 in this situation.
 
Can we see exactly what the C2's are for please? Ideally a photo of the consumer unit too. We can then give much better advice.

If it's simply missing RCD protection for lighting, then BPG4 (best Practise Guide 4) has that as a C3.
1632219020292.png
(It's been interesting to me since joining NAPIT that an awful lot of their members distance themselves from Codebreakers, including some of the leadership (in private).
There's in fact a thread on the Napit forum asking how is it that Napit contribute to BPG4 yet publish a book contradicting it! I've yet to buy enough popcorn to read the thread to the end!)
 
Matthewd29 said:
C2 is perfectly justified in this situation. Its down to the person who is signing the certificate whether to c2 or c3 in this situation.
Click to expand...
C2 MAY be perfectly justified. But I disagree it IS justified.

we code to the guidelines layer down. Nowhere does it say in any guidelines or regs lighting circuits without RCD protection in domestic are potentially dangerous.

other factors in the lighting circuit may justify having the lighting as C2 but not just being without RCD protection.

it’s down to the individual tester. Yes but within the guidelines.

I hate showers without rcd protection, but I don’t give them a C2. I can’t. Unless another issue arises that justifies it.
 
New posts

Reply to EICR unsatisfactory due to 'no RCD protection to lighting circuits' in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

Similar Threads

S
Communal DB does it require RCD protection to be a sat EICR
Question is does this DB really need RCD protection as there are only internal lights and sockets supplying this large building that used to be a...
Replies
13
Views
568
mhar
M
B
EICR - Garden Lighting RCD
Good Afternoon All Currently doing an EICR on common parts of a big site with multiple blocks. All blocks have outside garden spike lighting in...
Replies
11
Views
602
newfutile
newfutile
D
I've just been asked to do a commercial EICR
Hi everybody, I've been asked to do a EICR in a commercial property, So i popped in to have a look on my way home quickly and found the lighting...
Replies
8
Views
498
Danny Greg
D
M
Amending EICR report from unsatisfactory to satisfactory
So I've recently had an EICR for my building. Came back with about 20 odd C2 remedials and a few F1's which resulted in UNSATISFACTORY being...
Replies
5
Views
1K
davesparks
davesparks
A
EICR Unsatisfactory - New Property
Hi, I have a property that I was looking to rent out. Its 12 years old property so relatively new. I had a EICR done from a qualified electrican...
2
Replies
59
Views
7K
DPG
DPG

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
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

YOUR Unread Posts

Tags

advice aus cable circuit course earth electric electrical electrician hello led light lighting lights looking new please question rcd socket supply switch testing training wiring
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Tiling Advice
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

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.

I've Disabled AdBlock