Electric help

[Mrbobj]

All the electrician did was re label the fuses to what they do and wrote under the switches took it apart had a look and then put it all back together 

 

[Murdoch]

All the electrician did was re label the fuses to what they do and wrote under the switches took it apart had a look and then put it all back together 

how long was he in the flat?

 

[kerching]

how long was he in the flat?

Less than 15 minutes!

 

[Fleeting]

tell me where in pre 18th edition is says you can’t mix and match. You can’t go around being the electrical police with nothing to back it up

fwiw, I have never done it but it would seem many people are still doing it now

Pre18th Ed does not quote "mix and match" . Read Regulation 510.3 in the 17th Ed which references manufacturers' instructions . Do you seriously believe Mr Hager would entertain Mrs Wylex sharing a bed in the same dist board? This is not a new thing it is ignorance which has been highlighted by the 18th Ed and those who have just grasped this should question their ability to carry out EICRs. 

 

[Mrbobj]

He has there for 2hours 

 

[Mrbobj]

He has there for 2hours 

He was there for two hours I mean 

 

[Murdoch]

Pre18th Ed does not quote "mix and match" . Read Regulation 510.3 in the 17th Ed which references manufacturers' instructions . Do you seriously believe Mr Hager would entertain Mrs Wylex sharing a bed in the same dist board? This is not a new thing it is ignorance which has been highlighted by the 18th Ed and those who have just grasped this should question their ability to carry out EICRs. 

Here you go AGAIN. 

For decades installers have mixed and matched components (not me) , but now they are sort of frowned upon and where you encounter it on an EICR its a C3 ...............

And new installs are being done like this TODAY

It's never been okay the 18th Ed just reinforced the error of people's ways.

The 18th edition just goes to show how much influence BEAMA have over the IET - they get to sell more kit

 

[Mrbobj]

I have the EICR now guys which section would you like to see 

 

[Mrbobj]

https://ibb.co/xz8CpDv

https://ibb.co/7ttGJ1J

 

[Murdoch]

https://ibb.co/xz8CpDv

https://ibb.co/7ttGJ1J

Interesting - suggesting RCD protection for sockets as a C3 yet the fuseboard has a RCD

Could you screen shot the table of test results? and any comments the inspector has made about the installation?

 

[Mrbobj]

https://ibb.co/WpQrf2F
https://ibb.co/dsvyXNC
https://ibb.co/7SB24ZX

 

[Murdoch]

On the schedule of test results, circuit 1 says DB 1 supply. 
 

where is DB1 ? And it’s test results

 

[Fleeting]

It has no circuit reference. It looks like the submain and they have squeezed onto the same schedule but they have listed the protective device as NA.

 

[Murdoch]

It has no circuit reference. It looks like the submain and they have squeezed onto the same schedule but they have listed the protective device as NA.

I’m looking at this on my phone and yes you are probably correct

 that’s rubbish imho

 

[Mrbobj]

On the schedule of test results, circuit 1 says DB 1 supply. 
 

where is DB1 ? And it’s test results

you seen all of the report now 

a different electrician coming tomorrow morning to see how to split supply

 

[Doc Hudson]

On the schedule of test results, circuit 1 says DB 1 supply. 
 

where is DB1 ? And it’s test results

I imagine the board from the earlier image is DB1 https://ibb.co/DfBsnw4

Doc H.

 

[Murdoch]

I imagine the board from the earlier image is DB1 https://ibb.co/DfBsnw4

Doc H.

Actually I think you are correct but surely the schedule should say supply to DB2!

 

[Fleeting]

The schedule you see is for the one inside the apartment. That first line on the schedule I suspect is its supply which they have squeezed on, that schedule tallys with his board. None of them are numbered they just happened to call it DB1.

 

[Murdoch]

The schedule you see is for the one inside the apartment. That first line on the schedule I suspect is its supply which they have squeezed on, that schedule tallys with his board. None of them are numbered they just happened to call it DB1.

The inspector should IMHO of detailed the "joined" board, the shown on a separate schedule the fuseboard in the flat and then it would have highlighted the "other" supply

My thoughts are that spark 1 was blind to the problem or just wanted to report what he wanted to, which isn't any good really ............

Lets hope we get feed back on what Spark 2 says.........

 

[Fleeting]

He hasn't reported anything apart from rambling on about rcds and some of that is incorrect.