Observing fire detection shortfalls on EICRs

[spud1]

Hi all, Do you guys and girls make observations on the fire detection when you do an EICR? If so how do you code it? I've always observed shortfalls in fire detection on an EICR and coded it seperately as 'FIRE' but I was chatting to another sparky the other day who incorporates his fire detection obs into the normal C1, C2, C3, FI coding system. What's your opinion?

 

[UNG]

Hi all, Do you guys and girls make observations on the fire detection when you do an EICR? If so how do you code it? I've always observed shortfalls in fire detection on an EICR and coded it seperately as 'FIRE' but I was chatting to another sparky the other day who incorporates his fire detection obs into the normal C1, C2, C3, FI coding system. What's your opinion?

What is he coding if it's the mains wiring ok anything else is really out of the remit of an EICR other than maybe a comment on the age of the detectors

 

[telectrix]

no code. a comment may be justified, optional as outside of the remit of EICR , unless as he ^^^ sez. problem/s with the wiring.

 

[Darkwood]

As above the EICR is an inspection of the electrical installation in regards to its safety and its compliance either to the time it wa installed if not a safety concern or to modern regulations, unless the BS7671 stipulates in its regulations what you are covering with these extra comments then it can only be done as a separate observational point/ recommendation additional to the EICR and not part of it.

 

[Lister1987]

Any non-compliances with 5839-1 (or -6) can be noted against 560.10.

Being that a fire detection system is a life safety system, any obvious nonconformities that DON'T hinder the system operation I would attract a C2, any that did affect system operation would be a C1, on the basis that if the system isn't to standard or working then you would not be able to Guarantee operation as intended.

SparkyNinja/e5 did an interesting vid on EICRs that encounter fire alarms, worth a watch.

 

[Flanders]

I have mention on EICRs if a mains powered smoke detector is damaged or missing and wrote it down as info on the report. I would only code it if it was electrical unsafe ( if there was exposed live parts for example) as others have said there is no requirement in an EICR to confirm the fire alarm is working correctly. If the property is rented i believe it is requirement that the smoke detector are inspected annually but that would be on a separate report.

 

[Flanders]

Any non-compliances with 5839-1 (or -6) can be noted against 560.10.

Being that a fire detection system is a life safety system, any obvious nonconformities that DON'T hinder the system operation I would attract a C2, any that did affect system operation would be a C1, on the basis that if the system isn't to standard or working then you would not be able to Guarantee operation as intended.

SparkyNinja/e5 did an interesting vid on EICRs that encounter fire alarms, worth a watch.

Not sure you could give it code 1 . As a code 1 constitutes an immediate danger, there will only be a dangerous situation if the building catches of fire and the smoke alarm does not inform the occupier. So that would be a potential danger. You do have a good point about reg 560.10. Though

 

[Lister1987]

Not sure you could give it code 1 . As a code 1 constitutes an immediate danger, there will only be a dangerous situation if the building catches of fire and the smoke alarm does not inform the occupier. So that would be a potential danger. You do have a good point about reg 560.10. Though

I know it doesn't meet the ethos behind C1 (I can see it, I can touch it, it will kill me now) but as a C2 would have the desired effect it's rare a C1 would be issued, such as cover missing from the FCU Spur and so live parts being visible.

 

[UNG]

Any non-compliances with 5839-1 (or -6) can be noted against 560.10.

Being that a fire detection system is a life safety system, any obvious nonconformities that DON'T hinder the system operation I would attract a C2, any that did affect system operation would be a C1, on the basis that if the system isn't to standard or working then you would not be able to Guarantee operation as intended.

SparkyNinja/e5 did an interesting vid on EICRs that encounter fire alarms, worth a watch.

Noted is slightly different to coding a non conformity with BS5839 beyond the wiring how far do you go into BS5839-6 system and beyond the scope of the BS7671 inspection you are employed to do

Do you confirm any radio links are functioning correctly do you check the sound levels at the bed head comply with the requirements while you are there as well

I would like to know how you would handle a commercial EICR with a BS5839-1 system installed
Also how many BS5839-6 systems have you coded with a C1 or C2 while doing EICR's

TBH a lot of these videos are not worth a watch and are not even worth the bandwidth they take up

 

[Lister1987]

Noted is slightly different to coding a non conformity with BS5839 beyond the wiring how far do you go into BS5839-6 system and beyond the scope of the BS7671 inspection you are employed to do

Do you confirm any radio links are functioning correctly do you check the sound levels at the bed head comply with the requirements while you are there as well

I would like to know how you would handle a commercial EICR with a BS5839-1 system installed
Also how many BS5839-6 systems have you coded with a C1 or C2 while doing EICR's

TBH a lot of these videos are not worth a watch and are not even worth the bandwidth they take up

This is where the knowledge of the inspector (and any prior agreements with client) would decide exactly how far one goes.

I wouldn't go deliberately looking for 5839 deviations but any obvious ones that would make me question the efficiency of the system would get a C3 and further noting about getting a service done to correct any deeper issues.

As an electrician you could only code what you could see, if however you also had working and sufficient knowledge of 5839-1 to do what equates to a handover inspection (you're taking over a system from another provider so you do your own inspection noting system makeup etc), but if that person had such knowledge and was ethically switched on enough to include enough in the report to highlight the issue but not so much as to give away a complete service, then I would have no issue with it at all.