EICR - Hob and Oven Connections

[SUNRAY]

Specifications and "MIs" are surely two totally different issues, aren't they?

But are they?

If the specification and / or data sheet and / or MI says fit a sackacaki123 to complete the installation, doesn't that mean it requires a sackacaki123 to complete the installation or we can't be held responsible for damage caused by not fitting a sackacaki123?

 

[ebee]

Well we could be held responsible if the damage is caused by not fitting a sackacaki 123 but not if it is due to other causes, us not fitting one does not give them a get out of jail free card but they might well try to claim that

 

[JohnW2]

But are they? .... If the specification and / or data sheet and / or MI says fit a sackacaki123 to complete the installation, doesn't that mean it requires a sackacaki123 to complete the installation or we can't be held responsible for damage caused by not fitting a sackacaki123?

That's probably true but your "and/or"s are all wrong.

Going back to your initial example of a jack with a 1 ton lifting capacity, that is a fact which would be stated in the Specification and/or Data Sheet (or, if neither existed, at least in product labelling or packaging) but those documents would give no 'instructions' about out use of the product - that's what the "MIs" do.

What you suggest is (in relation to the MIs) particularly (probably unusually) reasonable, because it says that the manufacturer cannot be held responsible for damage "caused by not fitting a sackacaki". The problem we so often see discussed (alleged 'invalidated warranties') arises when, for example, leaks arise, the pump fails or the door falls off one's washing machine, and the manufacturer claims 'not to be responsible (under warranty) because someone had cut off the mains plug and wired the machine to an FCU!!

Kind Regards, John

 

[SUNRAY]

That's probably true but your "and/or"s are all wrong.

Going back to your initial example of a jack with a 1 ton lifting capacity, that is a fact which would be stated in the Specification and/or Data Sheet (or, if neither existed, at least in product labelling or packaging) but those documents would give no 'instructions' about out use of the product - that's what the "MIs" do.

I have never purchased a new jack, but I have purchased a chain hoist and axle stands some 50 years ago and I can assure there were certainly instructions on use, warnings, precautions and care with both. I don't imagine they have stopped that.

First hit on google gives basic instructions, such as positioning, topping up and not exceeding liftng capicity:

Instruction Manual 2 Tonne Hydraulic Trolley Jack - Halfords

Instruction Manual 2 Tonne Hydraulic Trolley Jack - Read more about valve, hydraulic, saddle, manual, halfords and lifting.

www.yumpu.com

What you suggest is (in relation to the MIs) particularly (probably unusually) reasonable, because it says that the manufacturer cannot be held responsible for damage "caused by not fitting a sackacaki".

Correct

The problem we so often see discussed (alleged 'invalidated warranties') arises when, for example, leaks arise, the pump fails or the door falls off one's washing machine, and the manufacturer claims 'not to be responsible (under warranty) because someone had cut off the mains plug and wired the machine to an FCU!!

Kind Regards, John

But that is EDIT: not what has been discussed here,

 

[ebee]

The problem we so often see discussed (alleged 'invalidated warranties') arises when, for example, leaks arise, the pump fails or the door falls off one's washing machine, and the manufacturer claims 'not to be responsible (under warranty) because someone had cut off the mains plug and wired the machine to an FCU!!

Bang Spot on there John

 

[SUNRAY]

Bang Spot on there John

But that is EDIT: not what has been discussed here,

 

[JohnW2]

I have never purchased a new jack, but I have purchased a chain hoist and axle stands some 50 years ago and I can assure there were certainly instructions on use, warnings, precautions and care with both. I don't imagine they have stopped that.

Why on earth are you making such a meal of this?

I merely responded to secure's comment that he thought references to MIs had been dropped from BS7671. In my response, I told him that the reference was still there but one now only has to 'take MIs into account", whereas previously one was required to 'comply' with the MIs.

Since then you have been going on about jacks, hoists and goodness knows what. As you say above, many/most products come with 'user instructions', sometimes very important ones - but we know that, and I can;'t see what it has to do my statement that appears to have started all this

Kind Regards, John

 

[SUNRAY]

Why on earth are you making such a meal of this?

I merely responded to secure's comment that he thought references to MIs had been dropped from BS7671. In my response, I told him that the reference was still there but one now only has to 'take MIs into account", whereas previously one was required to 'comply' with the MIs.

Since then you have been going on about jacks, hoists and goodness knows what. As you say above, many/most products come with 'user instructions', sometimes very important ones - but we know that, and I can;'t see what it has to do my statement that appears to have started all this

Kind Regards, John

We obviously have different views on this.
As I see it, it started with an EICR stating the oven and hob are incorrectly installed (C3), A situation which I feel occurs far too often by electricians incorrectly applying diversity to a device contrary to manufacturers instructions.

I added a comment to that effect and following others comments that I am wrong I simply tried to make a comparison with other products hoping to describe how we wouldn't dream of overloading other appliances and how to prevent damage to the oven (if I failed at that I apologise). After that I tried to explain why components don't require built in overload protection (if I failed at that I apologise).

Interestingly even these post seems to agree with me:

If anything that’s a C3...

...
There is a point that both cables need to be able to carry the current setting of fuse/MCB/RCBO and both need to be designed for that supply.
...

but then contradicted it with:

Then comment about potential overload just demonstrates that the inspector doesn’t apply or understand diversity

Ignore the C3 is my advice

Indicating the poster does not understand the application of diversity.

So I feel the seeds for the ruination of this thread were well and truly sown before before my first comment.

 

[JohnW2]

We obviously have different views on this.

We clearly do ...

As I see it, it started with an EICR stating the oven and hob are incorrectly installed ...

That's how the thread started. However, your recent comments (about jacks, hoists, etc.) started when you responded to, and quoted, my telling secure about the present situation regarding BS7671 an MIs - and, whilst your messages (always quoting me) may well have been relevant to the original thread, they have nothing to do with my small ('informative') contribution to the thread

Kind Regards, John

 

[securespark]

A situation which I feel occurs far too often by electricians incorrectly applying diversity to a device contrary to manufacturers instructions.

Can you expand a bit for me, please?

 

[SUNRAY]

We clearly do ...

That's how the thread started. However, your recent comments (about jacks, hoists, etc.) started when you responded to, and quoted, my telling secure about the present situation regarding BS7671 an MIs - and, whilst your messages (always quoting me) may well have been relevant to the original thread, they have nothing to do with my small ('informative') contribution to the thread

Kind Regards, John

Sorry to quote you again, or not, however most of my quotes of you are a direct response to your quotes of me, or another description could be a conversation. I haven't counted but I feel I quoted you less than the rest put together (apologies if that is not the case).

The point about this thread is the lack of suitable protection of a piece of equipment and several comments were (possibly correctly or incorrectly) stating it wasn't required (which my interpretation of OP's EICR inspection deemed it was), then you moved it on to cutting the plug off and wiring it to a FCU, which was not the topic being dicsussed (Although it could have been the origin of the situation) and, again my interpretation of the OP, is the EICR may verywell be suggesting fitting a FCU for the smaller item to resolve the problem.



Whatever the interpretations or misinterpretations I still stand by my opinion that a piece of equipment should be correctly protected, particularly the overload of wiring. I have some sympathy with downstream protection but I do not agree with inadequate protection, a 3KW oven on 1.25mm² flex (or one I replaced a little while back 1mm² on a 2.4kW oven) being protected by a 32/40/45A OCPD and totally agree with MI's stating it should be something smaller. I can think of many, many MI's that people wouldn't dream of ignoring, such as their car; petrol in the tank, oil in the sump, water in the radiator etc. Furthermore I struggle to understand that so many other posters will make the claim that the MCB/fuse is only there to protect the cable then completely ignore that when it comes to MI's.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Stop digging.

 

[SUNRAY]

A situation which I feel occurs far too often by electricians incorrectly applying diversity to a device contrary to manufacturers instructions.

Can you expand a bit for me, please?

EXAMPLE: Where MI's indicate the requirement to fit a 13A/16A fuse or other OCPD for a 3KW oven and it simply gets lumped onto the 32A with the 6KW hob.

 

[SUNRAY]

Stop digging.

I am far from digging.
I've been in too many situations sorting out other peoples crap and the resulting damage caused.

 

[ebee]

Well I think the crux of it is:-
Do we live in a Country/Continent/Bloc etc where the convention/rules/laws/standard practice is 1/ The OPD at the point of origin of the flex/last bit of the run , is there to protect the cable that protects that makes that connection and nothing else or 2/ It may also be needed to protect the appliance.
If we get goods manufactured from goods from one of those options and install it for use in the other then the seller should ensure it is fit for purpose for use in that place or not sell it?
So what are the rules in the UK Nation and do they differ in the different component countries that make up the UK?