retro fitting rcbo's into a non amd 3 board

[hot rod]

Hi guys, I've been asked to do an EICR on a property due to be rented out, and i had a quick visual today prior to booking to do the actual test, i noticed the installation has a starbreaker board with 4 circuits not being protected by rcd, which would obviously be a non-compliance for the test, i mentioned to the owner that ideally to have a new consumer unit would be great but he said a electrician friend suggested putting rcbo's on the non protected circuits, where do i stand with putting rcbo's in a plastic consumer unit, as im altering the circuit protection, the guy wants a 'clean bill of health' as such, I know its not classed as imminently dangerous to have a plastic ccu, so would need to be on the EICR as a C3 but i don't want to feel as though i am pushing him to have unnecessary work done.

 

[123]

What circuits aren't RCD protected?

A C3 shouldn't result in an unsatisfactory EICR, and I wouldn't (unless exceptional circumstance) be classing a plastic consumer unit as a defect.

 

[Flanders]

I can't see why not having any rcd protection on the 4 circuits would fail an eicr, if you are talking about cables in walls .... then that would normaly come up as a code 3 , it would only be sockets that can be used out doors that have no rcd protection would give you a code 2 imo , and yes you can fit rcbos in a plastic board as long as the cu is in good condition with no signs of thermal damage

 

[jackhammerJIM]

What makes you think 4 non rcd protected circuits will make the report unsatisfactory

 

[telectrix]

first. why do you think those 4 circuits need RCD protection? if it's only to comply with latest edition of BS7671, then it's a C3 recommendation at worst on an EICR.

 

[hot rod]

Yep, just 4 circuits that would be a C3, for being in the wall, cooker, 2 x lights and smokes.
so yes the installation would be classed as satisfactory, however, he was keen to have them in his words "updated with RCBO'S", one of these clients who thinks they know what they want/need, told him its not essential work nut he was still keen on having full rcd protection but was not so keen on a new board.
explained that the EICR would still have a C3 for the plastic board, but its in a good location, not an escape route not under stairs etc........

 

[LankyWill]

id be installing a 30ma rcd just before the fuseboard to save money in that instance.

 

[hot rod]

sorry if i was unclear, i didnt mean the 4 circuits would cause the EICR to be unsatisfactory, just that they would highlight a non-conformance hence a C3

 

[telectrix]

so fit him the RCBOs. as for the plastic CU i'd not even code it. a C3 means improvement recommended. how would a metal CU be an improvement, unless you're the london fire brigade\/

 

[123]

so fit him the RCBOs. as for the plastic CU i'd not even code it. a C3 means improvement recommended. how would a metal CU be an improvement, unless you're the london fire brigade\/

Same for me - customer seems insistent on it, as long as the CU can house the RCBO's, fit them and charge accordingly. A plastic CU is not a C3.

id be installing a 30ma rcd just before the fuseboard to save money in that instance.

Hmmmm surely that's just making things worse?

 

[westward10]

Not the OP but some people see a plastic CU and think it is about to self combust. As long as all terminations are sound it is up to you if you C3 it. As for fitting rcbos this will obviously give increased protection but the urgency if any will depend on the circuit designation. Fitting rcbos in an old Starbreaker board may be tight.

 

[hot rod]

hmm.... i'd always interpreted that ANYTHING not conforming to current regs should be noted as a C3, but as you say, it does state 'improvement recommended', and the guidance says that these items being noted would 'improve the safety of the installation', perhaps i'm being a little too paranoid, i try and be thorough and note everything!

 

[telectrix]

id be installing a 30ma rcd just before the fuseboard to save money in that instance.

COBBLERS.

 

[westward10]

hmm.... i'd always interpreted that ANYTHING not conforming to current regs should be noted as a C3, but as you say, it does state 'improvement recommended', and the guidance says that these items being noted would 'improve the safety of the installation', perhaps i'm being a little too paranoid, i try and be thorough and note everything!

Nothing wrong with noting everything it is what you should be doing. The lack of additional rcd protection must be assessed on the day no one can foresee the future, to see the possible risk it poses due to their absence unless it is obvious, such as one supplying an external socket.

 

[123]

hmm.... i'd always interpreted that ANYTHING not conforming to current regs should be noted as a C3, but as you say, it does state 'improvement recommended', and the guidance says that these items being noted would 'improve the safety of the installation', perhaps i'm being a little too paranoid, i try and be thorough and note everything!

That's almost every installation designed from 2015 and previous that will get a C3 then. An EICR isn't about what meets the current regs...it's about assessing the condition of the Installation for safety and continued use, using BS7671 as your reference.

I fitted my last plastic CU in July this year...it was for an unoccupied rewire that had a 3 year gap between 1st fix and 2nd fix, I've another sitting from 2011 but if and when they are finally ready will be pushing for an AMD 3 board as I much prefer them and they are now whats readily available.

 

[westward10]

What exactly is an AMD3 board, is it like a 16th Edition board that was.

 

[westward10]

id be installing a 30ma rcd just before the fuseboard to save money in that instance.

What about discrimination with the existing rcd.

 

[123]

What exactly is an AMD3 board, is it like a 16th Edition board that was.

It's merely a reference term for it - used to be 16th Edition Board, then 17th Edition boards (essentially Dual RCD boards), there are 17th Edition Testers (generally MFT's with Auto RCD tests), and now AMD 3 boards (either Dual RCD or Straight for RCBO's) that are Metal Clad with a silly door front for them.

Not that different to the term PAT Testing, totally wrong, but what's commonly known.

 

[westward10]

It's merely a reference term for it - used to be 16th Edition Board, then 17th Edition boards (essentially Dual RCD boards), there are 17th Edition Testers (generally MFT's with Auto RCD tests), and now AMD 3 boards (either Dual RCD or Straight for RCBO's) that are Metal Clad with a silly door front for them.

Not that different to the term PAT Testing, totally wrong, but what's commonly known.

Yeah I know was being fasceacious, soon be seeing ads for 18th Ed testers.

 

[hot rod]

Thanks for your opinions/guidance guys, i think i may have been too stuck with the routine of noting 'non compliances to current edition' that was a C4 from the old periodic inspection reports!!!!!!!
so.....generally you wouldn't note the plastic consumer unit provided it is in good serviceable condition etc?