EICR Failed - Is the electrician trying to make more work ?

[JohnW2]

Its i before e except after c ...

That's what we were all taught, but there are so many exceptions that I don't think it's really worth remembering!!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

I'd forgotten that. Which makes what it says in the Introduction weird, because using that definition it effectively becomes ....

Indeed - but it remains the "...may give rise to..." which causes most of the discussion.

Kind Regards, John

 

[He who knows]

That's what we were all taught, but there are so many exceptions that I don't think it's really worth remembering!!

In fact I'm sure I read once that that "rule" is wrong more often than it is right. And some words now spelt ..cei.. used to be spelt ..cie..

 

[ericmark]

I seem to remember reading in an early edition of the regulations that common sense should prevail, but that seems to have gone, and we have become students of English to work out what we can and can't do, would be interesting to read the Welsh version of BS 7671 which of course must exist or the laws in Wales could not refer to BS 7671, or it would make the law invalid. However my reading of Welsh is not very good so in real terms rather pointless asking for a copy.

Even in England it seems Welsh can be used, there was a report of a wedding which the couple wanted it done in Cornish, but it was not allowed, has to be in English or Welsh, but since in the National Eisteddfod they have Cornish speakers and Cornwell was at one point part of Wales can't see why not done in Welsh?

But still comes back to the same question, even if the regulations don't insist on RCD protection, we know morally it should be provided, yes a RCD Plug can be got for under £10, but how many would be required? It makes far more sense to have it built into the consumer unit, and only the landlord can do that.

 

[JohnW2]

In fact I'm sure I read once that that "rule" is wrong more often than it is right. And some words now spelt ..cei.. used to be spelt ..cie..

Quite so - that's what I said - that the 'rule' is so often wrong that it's not worth (probably best not to) remembering it!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

... even if the regulations don't insist on RCD protection, we know morally it should be provided...

That may be your view, but I think it is probably open to debate.

One could equally suggest that, for example, it is 'morally' necessary that national speed limits should be reduced to 50 or 60 mph (and strictly policed), since that would undoubtedly save far more lives, and prevent far more serious injuries, than RCDs ever could, but I doubt that you take that view.

Kind Regards, John

 

[He who knows]

Quite so - that's what I said - that the 'rule' is so often wrong that it's not worth (probably best not to) remembering it!

That could be validly said were the rule right > 50% of the time, but wrong in a significant number of cases. If there was, say, a 1 in 3 chance of it being wrong it would probably be best not to bother with it.

But the fact that it is wrong more often than it's right (if the Scrabble fan who wrote to QI was right by 923 words containing 'cie' vs 44 with 'cei') is even more egregious.

 

[JohnW2]

That could be validly said were the rule right > 50% of the time, but wrong in a significant number of cases. If there was, say, a 1 in 3 chance of it being wrong it would probably be best not to bother with it.

Agreed. Is that not what I was saying?

Kind Regards, John