D.I.Y. sparks

[Andy™]

And another thing!Why is a PIR not acceptable anyway? (And this may be a Part P thing) surely a proper PIR constitutes a full test of the entire electrical installation regardless of who has done the original installation or any additions...

elvis is most definately in the building!

?:-/

A PIR cannot be used to certify any work completed, it simply states the condition the wiring is in at the time of the test. now, if LABC want proof work carried out complies with 7671 (apart from next paragraph), then a satisfactory PIR, with no code 3 or 4's, should be enough to prove that work is done correctly.

Also, as a side note, from LABC's position, if the work completed does not have an EIC issued by the person doing the work (joe public, the builder etc), then that should be reasonable grounds to prove work has not been done to 7671, since 7671 says it must be inspected & tested and certified.

 

[elvis]

Andy,

What is the difference from an EIC and a PIR??

Why is a PIR dated after the final date of any works carried out any less valid than an EIC?? Other than the form that gets stapled to front of the report...

I know it's the regs but WHY??

EIC, PIR, PAT all worth the paper they are written on on the day they were written.

On the very few occasions that any of these documents may be presented in court they would be fairly flimsy evidence unless they were supported by strong physical evidence of negligence.

It was safe on the day I wuz there guv, I'm sueing Metrel!

 

[Andy™]

An EIC says you installed the system, and an EIC must be satisfactory

PIR is a report on the condition of the installation and it can be unsatisfactory

 

[Mark2spark]

Elvis, a PIR doesn't confirm that new wiring installed in an extension conforms to ALL parts of the Building Act 1984, ie the law, of which Part P is part of.

The BI ideally wants a member of a competent person scheme to certify it, as well as issue the EIC, because they want confirmation of joists holes (Part A structure) fire barriers (Part B) through walls etc etc all conform to ALL parts of the Act.

Thats why they want to see first fix completed and not tacked over if they are just going to accept your cert (EIC) cos the're happy with your C & G 236 whatever of your electrical competence, but can't be sure of your competence to install without fouling other parts of said Act.

But a 5 day wonder can because they have the EAL level 2 certificate which covers ALL part of the building regs.

Clear as mud huh?

 

[Mark2spark]

You are only signing to say that the earth fault loop for the different protective device installed will disconnect supply if there is a fault on that circuit.Batty

That's interesting batty, nice one.

Do you actually fill in something along those lines on the "extent of installation covered by this certificate" bit?

 

[steptoe]

I do quite a few of these, explain to customer it will be a PIR and I dont know if BC will accept it or not,it will still be

 

[Andy™]

If its a new install your checking and giving a report for LABC, LABC should fail it even if it has code 3 or 4. (new install not to current regs? wouldnt be allowed on an EIC)

 

[elvis]

Yup guys, you're all right, spent 2 days trying to think of an argument for this one and I can't!

Too much :Y and Guiness Drink ... elvis is leaving the building! Blushing:coat