Just one thing that's not been mentioned yet ...
Apart from ">200", ">1000", or whatever the limit for the meter is, the actual reading should be recorded on the EICR. At the point of having the EICR done, it makes little difference whether it's 89MΩ or 890MΩ. Both are high enough not to be of a concern, though with 89 I'd be thinking about any reasons for it - my last one, I couldn't get behind a freezer to unplug it and it didn't do the IR values any good
.
But next time, you are supposed to provide the inspector with a copy of the last EICR. I expect some charlatans will simply copy the results from the old one and charge for tests not done, but to an honest inspector it provides a means of seeing if there's been a deterioration.
So lets say that last time a circuit tested at 89MΩ (which is a little on the low side in the absence of damp, or an appliance you can't unplug), but now tests at (say) 37MΩ - then that should be a prompt to consider that something has changed for the worse. But if it still tests at 80-something MΩ then that's just within normal variances. On my flat I have a job on my list to replace an outside light that's got a little damp in it and creating a lowish IR - still OK, but a significant drop from the previous EICR.
The fact than an inspector would write <1000 in the IR column suggests to me that he is not competent to be doing such testing. He certainly doesn't understand the basics of filling out the form, and he definitely doesn't understand the reason we record the values in the first place. Otherwise, why bother recording numbers and just have a "go-nogo" meter and a tick box
Apart from ">200", ">1000", or whatever the limit for the meter is, the actual reading should be recorded on the EICR. At the point of having the EICR done, it makes little difference whether it's 89MΩ or 890MΩ. Both are high enough not to be of a concern, though with 89 I'd be thinking about any reasons for it - my last one, I couldn't get behind a freezer to unplug it and it didn't do the IR values any good
.But next time, you are supposed to provide the inspector with a copy of the last EICR. I expect some charlatans will simply copy the results from the old one and charge for tests not done, but to an honest inspector it provides a means of seeing if there's been a deterioration.
So lets say that last time a circuit tested at 89MΩ (which is a little on the low side in the absence of damp, or an appliance you can't unplug), but now tests at (say) 37MΩ - then that should be a prompt to consider that something has changed for the worse. But if it still tests at 80-something MΩ then that's just within normal variances. On my flat I have a job on my list to replace an outside light that's got a little damp in it and creating a lowish IR - still OK, but a significant drop from the previous EICR.
The fact than an inspector would write <1000 in the IR column suggests to me that he is not competent to be doing such testing. He certainly doesn't understand the basics of filling out the form, and he definitely doesn't understand the reason we record the values in the first place. Otherwise, why bother recording numbers and just have a "go-nogo" meter and a tick box
