ok to do this on cu change?

[paul b b]

Evening all,

was talking to an old mate the other day, hes been a spark for about 20 years. hes also a nic AC

i was talking about cu change problems ie...low ir results or borrowed netral.

he said that nic inspector told him that he could install a cu with on protected ways (the one with 3 n bars in) and any unsatisfactory results could be put unprotected!

anyone done this? he was supprised nic said it was ok.

anyone done this?

 

[Andy™]

well your not making the installation any worse than it already was, although if a circuit is unsafe, then i will not connect it unlesss its made safe

 

[MKS]

I always like to clear the issue, so personally don't do it!

 

[paul b b]

out of intrest andy, what ir result would you consider unsafe? i know regs asy 1m but in reality what is the lowest you would let go?

 

[Electroglow]

2mohm

 

[Steve3948]

Depends what, where and when

 

[SLIPSHOD & SLAPDASH]

You never know the exact details of these Chinese whisper NICEIC chats. In an emergency then i would be happy doing that, however on a planned job i dont believe its correct ( although no worse than it was )

 

[welchyboy]

I can't see that being true

If you install a new cu then connect an unsafe circuit to it you still have to put it in the cert, how would that work???

Bit of a cop out too, why not just sort the problem and do it properly?!

Sure he wasn't with elecsa, that I could believe!

 

[Steve3948]

Would you say a reading of 0.35Mohms is unsafe or just not satisfying the requirements.

Would you C1, C2, C3 it.

There was a time when 0.5Mohms was acceptable.

 

[professional]

I have seen many EIC`s with the departures box filled with non-compliances (e.g. I`ve changed the consumer unit but there is no bonding etc.) of the existing installation - clearly the muppets filling them in are totally unaware of what the box is actually for.

Anyone like to enlighten the forum?

---------- Post Auto-Merged at 17:26 ---------- Previous post was made at 17:20 ----------

Evening all,was talking to an old mate the other day, hes been a spark for about 20 years. hes also a nic AC

i was talking about cu change problems ie...low ir results or borrowed netral.

he said that nic inspector told him that he could install a cu with on protected ways (the one with 3 n bars in) and any unsatisfactory results could be put unprotected!

anyone done this? he was supprised nic said it was ok.

anyone done this?

Then his inspector is a moron - he wants a boot up his ****. The ONLY circumstances under which such a procedure can be carried out is a distress change - and someone qualified in DESIGN is required to make (and sign for) such a decision.

So all of you guys out there with NO DESIGN KNOWLEDGE OR EXPERIENCE had better think twice before bodging another board onto a crappy install and doing a runner before the RCD`s start "playing up" .... because YOU are liable NOT the QS in the office. ] , and without appropriate design knowledge and experience you won`t have a leg to stand on.

---------- Post Auto-Merged at 17:39 ---------- Previous post was made at 17:26 ----------

Would you say a reading of 0.35Mohms is unsafe or just not satisfying the requirements.Would you C1, C2, C3 it.

There was a time when 0.5Mohms was acceptable.

The Coding system is relevant to the regulations in force at the time of the I&T procedure - so if the regs require a min of 1Meg for re-connection then so be it.

Logically, any circuit that fails to meet the min requirement for re-connection must be a Code 1 or Code 2 as, by definition, it makes the installation "UNSATISFACTORY" with regards an EICR carried out immediately afterwards.

You cannot issue an EIC that would fail an EICR carried out immediately afterwards (I apologise in advance to all those who already seem to do just that).

Along the same lines - just because an EICR deems an installation "SATISFACTORY" does not mean that subsequent installation work can be carried out without some degree of remedials also being carried out.