EICR failed on things that passed the previous time

[DamoZ]

Hi all,

I got an EICR done just to check how the electrics were in my house as it hadn't been done for about 5 years by the previous owner and few issues have come up. Some expected and some not expected and that were not considered issues on the previous report. The electrician wants to quote me to sort them all so I just wanted to run it past some other electricians to see if he's taking me for a bit of a ride or if the previous EICR was too lax.

1. The surface mounted fused spur for the boiler has the cable going into the top of it through the standard knock-out holes that cables usually go through in a surface mounted fused spur. He says dust could get in and cause a fire so it needs to be replaced (photo attached).

2. The meter tails have the secondary insulation cut back slightly where they enter the meter and also where they enter a henley block so that you can see the blue and brown primary insulation. This appears to have been done deliberately to make it obvious which is live and neutral and I've looked at a friends house and it was the same there too. He says this is a fail and wants to replace the tails?

3. There's a swa cable that runs outside along the wall to a secondary bathroom water heater. Its enters a round metal water tight junction box just before it enters in through the wall. It's correctly glanded with a swa gland but there's a short section (5cm) of twin and earth coming from the other side of the junction box that is exposed before it goes in through the wall. He said that was a C2 fault but the previous electrician had said it was a C3 because it was such a small length so wasn't potentially dangerous so wasn't a C2? He want's to replace the swa cable but surely there's a simpler solution? Could I just add some trunking or conduit or something like that to protect it from the UV and damage (it's not in direct sunlight however)? Sorry I forgot to take a photo of this but I'll add one later.

I look forward to hearing your opinions!

 

[pcaouolte]

1. If worried about dust entering the box (it won't cause a problem) you could put a small amount of sealant around the cable.
2. The meter tails entering the meter were installed by the meter fitter. It isn't perfect but it isn't going to hurt anyone and it does appear to have been done deliberately.
3 The SWA sounds ok. A bit of twin and earth outside will last for many years. Again it isn't perfect but it isn't likely to hurt anyone if the insulation on the cable is intact. Don't bother trying to protect it, moving it about might crack the insulation.

Next time use a different electrician.

If you really feel the need to employ someone to correct any of these minor items, don't use the electrician who did the EICR.

 

[Murdochcat]

Your house, you live in it.

You have no obligation to act on the report

And the meter tails are out of scope to code on an EICR

The twin and earth, if it’s not deteriorated is simply not a C3 let alone a C2

In summary - don’t let the so called spark who did the EiCR back in your home

 

[Taylortwocities]

Agreed with the above. The items should be "improvement recommended" so deserve C3 only.
That would result in a "satisfactory" for your installation.

 

[ericmark]

I also agree with three above, and if the electrician wants to quote for doing work which can only be done by the DNO in regard to meter tails, that seems suspect.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I also agree.

 

[DamoZ]

Thanks for your help, and good to see that everybody agrees! I definitely won't be getting that electrician back again!

 

[SUNRAY]

Blatant revenue creation scheme

 

[ebee]

Well it is down to the inspector on the day to decide to what extent and why codes are allocated (if at all).
However it does all seem OTT as others have said and is a bit reminiscent of job creation scheme..
If he merely just mentioned these things to you then good for him but to push them for remedials is a bit OTT though.
Plus. as said, some of that the electrician should not be touching, it is down to the supplier of your electricity.

 

[SUNRAY]

No one has pointed out that cutting the outer sheath a little short like that was the standard thing to do to allow quick visual identification.

 

[JohnW2]

No one has pointed out that cutting the outer sheath a little short like that was the standard thing to do to allow quick visual identification.

Particularly when that practice reveals something which would render that "quick visual identification' incorrect - as in this oft-posted piccie of the neutral block at the origin of my installation ...

 

[Risteard]

Although it was reasonably standard practice, removing the sheath from the cable outside of the enclosure isn't acceptable. I would wholeheartedly agree with a C2 Observation being utilised for this. And a check of meter tails is included within the inspection schedule for periodic inspection and testing.

 

[JohnW2]

Although it was reasonably standard practice, removing the sheath from the cable outside of the enclosure isn't acceptable.

Strictly probably true, even though the probability of anyone coming to any harm as a result of a few mm of exposed insulation must be very close to zero.

I would wholeheartedly agree with a C2 Observation being utilised for this.

Given what I have just written, is it really reasonable to describe such a situation as "Potentially dangerous - urgent remedial action required" ?

And a check of meter tails is included within the inspection schedule for periodic inspection and testing.

It is. However, if the person who undertook this EICR was, as some have suggested, engaging in 'revenue generation' he could well find himself in deep water if he quoted for 'remedying' the meter tails

 

[SUNRAY]

However, if the person who undertook this EICR was, as some have suggested, engaging in 'revenue generation' he could well find himself in deep water if he quoted for 'remedying' the meter tails

Unless the contrator is one of the rare breed still authorised to pull the cutout and carries registered crimpers

 

[Adam_151]

Although it was reasonably standard practice, removing the sheath from the cable outside of the enclosure isn't acceptable. I would wholeheartedly agree with a C2 Observation being utilised for this. And a check of meter tails is included within the inspection schedule for periodic inspection and testing.

This, I understand that previously small amounts of unsheathed cores st switchgear terminations were acceptable at one time, but that was roughly 70 years ago, and its interesting to note that the practice still seems to persist even amongst folk who's *parents* were born well after it ceased to be acceptable.

Quite often with terminations like that, its possible to get a test probe down the side of the conductor and onto the live terminal, which you cant do if its been terminated correctly with the grey pushing up against the case and the inner left 7mm ish longer to continue inside to the terminal. You get folk who do the opposide and cut both back level and that sometimes lets you expose the copper by bending the cable!