Electrical Instalation condition report codes details

[Dimeo77]

Can I mention once again that there should not be regulation numbers on a condition report it should be written for the client to understand. No one expects the client should look up 18th edition to see what's up. Write "no RCD protection on ring. Bathroom light does not comply with regulations, fault on lighting circuit. " not numbers of regulations simple language

In my opinion (professional) It requires both (no one more than the other), As it is a document that can be used in conjunction with legal requirements it needs the specifics (coding), but I totally agree also that one needs a customer/recipient to understand, so also, a clear explanation is required.

Separately and with regard to the second cu in the garage, is only one cu covered in the limitations? (probably not) however the listed limitations are essential in any EICR, I'd say without them it is a 100% inspection (it's all in amendment 3).

 

[Dimeo77]

Can I mention once again that there should not be regulation numbers on a condition report it should be written for the client to understand. No one expects the client should look up 18th edition to see what's up. Write "no RCD protection on ring. Bathroom light does not comply with regulations, fault on lighting circuit. " not numbers of regulations simple language

As has been said to a degree: In my opinion (professional) It requires both (no one more than the other), As it is a document that can be used in conjunction with legal requirements it needs the specifics (coding), but I totally agree also that one needs a customer/recipient to understand, so also, a clear explanation is required.

Separately and with regard to the second cu in the garage, is only one cu covered in the limitations? (probably not) however the listed limitations are essential in any EICR, I'd say without them it is a 100% inspection (it's all in amendment 3).

Ps my apologies if this appears elsewhere, there was a website freeze when writing this before, (other posts hadn't loaded?)

 

[binky]

As has been said to a degree: In my opinion (professional) It requires both (no one more than the other), As it is a document that can be used in conjunction with legal requirements it needs the specifics (coding), but I totally agree also that one needs a customer/recipient to understand, so also, a clear explanation is required.

Separately and with regard to the second cu in the garage, is only one cu covered in the limitations? (probably not) however the listed limitations are essential in any EICR, I'd say without them it is a 100% inspection (it's all in amendment 3).

Ps my apologies if this appears elsewhere, there was a website freeze when writing this before, (other posts hadn't loaded?)

But lets be rank, the only reason the section numbers of BS7671 appear on most EICRs today is because they are auto generated by software packages. I would agree it's good practice to include them, but, for a customer totally meaningless.

 

[Jdinduntocher]

It was just an example, not actual quote

 

[Dimeo77]

But lets be rank, the only reason the section numbers of BS7671 appear on most EICRs today is because they are auto generated by software packages. I would agree it's good practice to include them, but, for a customer totally meaningless.

But an EICR is not just for the customer? It is for many other legal purposes and that is why BOTH are essential, not just advised. (and I for one don't plan to be 'rank' )

 

[Fleeting]

But it isn't advised at all in BS7671.

 

[Dimeo77]

It was just an example, not actual quote

Sorry , of what? not challenging, just wondering.

 

[Dimeo77]

But it isn't advised at all in BS7671.

page 474 bs7671 - 'OBSERVATIONS' - include schedule reference as appropriate. So... I think it does?