External Light RCD protection needed?

[Dave78]

Hi All,

I wondered if someone might be able to help me out with an answer, and I understand things aren't always black and white in the world of electrics but i could do with some clarity. I am not a sparky and as such will do my best to ask the question.

I have had an electrical test done on a domestic flat I own, it seems to suggest that all circuits should be RCD protected, currently just the sockets are, i read this as a recommendation rather than a requirement as it is noted as a C3 - 'Improvement Recommended', is this the general way to go now that all circuits should be RCD protected? 

But my main concern is there is an existing external light just above the front door, the consumer unit is just inside the front door so about 3 meters between them. The cabling for the outside light is on its own circuit breaker but not RCD protected (I guess its always been like this) the tester has deemed this a C2 - Potentially dangerous.

The cabling is not visible inside the house, it is activated from a pull cord switch in the lobby, it is not a new circuit, so my question is do i have to convert this into an RCD protected circuit? if so whats the cheapest way to achieve this? 

Thanks for your time.

Dave

 

[Essex1]

Hi. 

Are all the cables in the flat chased in the wall?

 

[Dave78]

Hi, Thanks for answering, internally yes, externally, I don't think so, I don't recall, but maybe a small amount?

 

[Essex1]

Then the C3 codings are correct. From what you have said the C2 should also only be a C3. Has the electrician written the regulation number that the C2 refers you?

 

[binky]

total non-sense, you have a 16th edition installation, no need to RCd anything other than sockets likley to supply portable equipment outdoors. The easy way to achieve this was RCD all power ccts. If you can plug your lawnmower into the light then the C2 is correct. :^O

Under the change to 17th it became compulsory to provide RCD protection for sockets and cables not buried more than 50mm in  the wall, which can apply to lighting. RCDing all ccts also removed the need in most cases for cross bonding in bathrooms. Even then it is permitted under certain circumstances to non-rcd protected ccts. Normally a dedicated cct for an appliance like a fridge. We test to 17th, but that does not make 16th installations and instant fail. IMHO a 16th edition set-up is totally adequate for rental purposes.

 

[NozSpark]

It might be a C2 if there is a damaged accessory, an accessory which is unsuitable for its location or incorrect polarity at a ES lamp holder though...

 

[binky]

post states for lack of RCD - C2

 

[NozSpark]

I'm afraid it doesn't...

However for lack of RCD a C2 is excessive if the outside light was installed prior to the regulation that requires RCD protection for buried cables.

 

[Essex1]

I'm afraid it doesn't...

However for lack of RCD a C2 is excessive if the outside light was installed prior to the regulation that requires RCD protection for buried cables.

It is not excessive it is incorrect. 

 

[Essex1]

total non-sense, you have a 16th edition installation, no need to RCd anything other than sockets likley to supply portable equipment outdoors. The easy way to achieve this was RCD all power ccts. If you can plug your lawnmower into the light then the C2 is correct. :^O

Under the change to 17th it became compulsory to provide RCD protection for sockets and cables not buried more than 50mm in  the wall, which can apply to lighting. RCDing all ccts also removed the need in most cases for cross bonding in bathrooms. Even then it is permitted under certain circumstances to non-rcd protected ccts. Normally a dedicated cct for an appliance like a fridge. We test to 17th, but that does not make 16th installations and instant fail. IMHO a 16th edition set-up is totally adequate for rental purposes.

Although an installation is designed and installed to a previous edition the testing must be done to the current regs. Anything that is not to the current regs but do not impose a safety risk would warrant a C3 code. GN3 also states that if unsure about the design/installation date that the installation must be tested in full to the current regs. I would argue that unless you had a full set of certificates on the installation it would be unlikely that anyone could be sure. For example if a home owner decides today to build an extension next month which requires a new CU. In 10-15 years time it would be impossible to determine whether the works were done before 01/01/2016 or after. So is that plastic CU a C3 or a C2?   

If there is no paper trail then the installation should be tested to the current regs IMO. 

 

[Andy™]

If there is no paper trail then the installation should be tested to the current regs IMO. 

testing should always be done to current regs regardless of when it was installed

 

[Essex1]

testing should always be done to current regs regardless of when it was installed

You know what I meant. 

 

[Murdoch]

A C2 for an outside light "circuit" must be an error on the part of the tester.

OP - suggest you email the sparky and ask him which reg he thinks the circuit is breaking as this IMHO is a C3 from what has been outlined.

 

[Dave78]

Thank you all for your comments, from what I can tell most people think that it's fair enough it was picked up as a non regulation issue but maybe the c2 category is not correct and it should be a c3. We are going to go back to the tester and ask what reg this is failing on to cause a c2 and why they feel it is classed as potentially dangerous and immediate fix needed.

Thanks again for all the replies.

Dave

 

[Doc Hudson]

A damaged or broken fitting, or a light that is not suitable for outdoor use could be classed as potentially dangerous. But I assume as this is above the front door, it is out of immediate reach of any person without the use of ladders or steps, so even non RCD protected the lamp cannot present much potential danger of shock or injury.

Doc H. 

 

[binky]

Although an installation is designed and installed to a previous edition the testing must be done to the current regs.  Anything that is not to the current regs but do not impose a safety risk would warrant a C3 code. GN3 also states that if unsure about the design/installation date that the installation must be tested in full to the current regs. I would argue that unless you had a full set of certificates on the installation it would be unlikely that anyone could be sure. For example if a home owner decides today to build an extension next month which requires a new CU. In 10-15 years time it would be impossible to determine whether the works were done before 01/01/2016 or after. So is that plastic CU a C3 or a C2?   

If there is no paper trail then the installation should be tested to the current regs IMO. 

Whilst not completely accurate, age of installation can usually be determined by the board, Single RCD protecting power circuits and not lights is 99.9% certain to be 16th Edition. You can also usually tell by the make and style of board, cabling etc etc. Generally speaking the customer has a pretty good idea when works were done anyway. Paperwork is also generally missing regardless. So whilst not entirely accurate, a reasonable assessment of age can be justified, and codes applied appropiately. IMHO opinion a C2 for the outside light is not justified, and smacks of generating work, or lack of knowledge - common amoungst younger electricians and 5ww brigade.

 

[Essex1]

Whilst not completely accurate, age of installation can usually be determined by the board, Single RCD protecting power circuits and not lights is 99.9% certain to be 16th Edition. You can also usually tell by the make and style of board, cabling etc etc. Generally speaking the customer has a pretty good idea when works were done anyway. Paperwork is also generally missing regardless. So whilst not entirely accurate, a reasonable assessment of age can be justified, and codes applied appropiately. IMHO opinion a C2 for the outside light is not justified, and smacks of geerating work, or lack of knowledge - common amoungst younger electricians and 5ww brigade.

I agree with that.  No RCD on an outside light fitted to the wall is not a C2.

 

[Mark2spark]

For example if a home owner decides today to build an extension next month which requires a new CU. In 10-15 years time it would be impossible to determine whether the works were done before 01/01/2016 or after. So is that plastic CU a C3 or a C2?   

If there is no paper trail then the installation should be tested to the current regs IMO. 

I haven't looked myself yet, but have the new metal boards got a date stamp inside them? Like the plastic ones had started having over the last few years?

I'd assumed that the date stamp inside boards was so that building control could assess under part p some idea of the date of installation, - certainly after notification of a new/changed CU became a mandate anyway.

 

[SLIPSHOD & SLAPDASH]

Nearly all items have date stamps, Some are in code. I doubt its anything to do with building control who would not take a lid of a c/u. 

 

[binky]

that's all to do with Quality Control procedures and being able to trace batches of products