PIR Domestic

[vera121]

Here's some observations from a PIR report on a recent house survey given to me, form the new owner. There were 19 in all, I've picked the best one's out. (I've been on DIYnot before but cant log on under my old user name for some reason) - vera & co
The PIR report was on a green NIC paper, I did not see any other pages.
This is it verbatim:

3, no main earth from supply company. Code 3 + 1

8, no earth onto metal socket boxes. Code 4

9, no round 20mm gromits on entry holes to socket boxes and light switch boxes. Code 4

12, no main earth onto central heating pipe work. Code 1

14 no suplementery cross bonding bathroom pipe work or radiator. Code 4

15 no mains powerd smoke detectors. Code 1

17 no RCD protection on lighting circuits as specified 17th edition regs BS July 08. Code 1

18 high earth reading. Code 1


My observation's;

3 the property is supplied from next door and there is no evidence of there ever been a main earth.
9 the light switch patteress are the 16mm type with the bevelled/rounded entry holes.
14 not required, no shower etc just lighting circuit.
15 there was 1 cheap battery powered smoke detector.
18 no main earth so no Ze reading!

I've only done a quick visual on the installation and will be going back next week to rectify.
have no idea who the 'Electrician' was!

 

[GaryMo]

8 - No earth link required if there's a fixed lug on the backbox

9 - Is there any signs of damage to the outer sheath of the cables?

12 - Expand on this one please. Is there PEB to all incoming services which could introduce a potential, eg water, gas, lpg, oil, cast iron soil stack....?

14 - Supplementary bonding may still be required. Is the lighting point within a zone?

15 - Isn't covered by BS7671

17 - The guy is an idiot and should not be carrying out PIR's

18 Obviously relates to number 3

 

[Spark123]

A green certificate is available for anyone to fill in, not just NICEIC contractors.
3 - agree with code 1
8 - not really a problem with sockets if the backbox isn't accessable and theres a fixed lug.
9 - Agree
12 - Unless there is some reason for the pipework to be extraneous then it may not need to be bonded anyway
14 - Might be required, depends on the circumstances
15 - Not really a BS7671 issue.
17 - Not imo a code 1, I'd consider it a 4 if it was installed correctly to the 16th or earlier.
18 - I'd hazard a guess it may be something to do with no 3!

DOH! Beaten by GM!!

 

[vera121]

12 the gas and water services are bonded back to the consumer unit.

14 not required, out of zone.

The guy is an idiot, god knows how he got the job to do a pir, I will try and find out more next week.

 

[dingbat]

The guy is an idiot, god knows how he got the job to do a pir, I will try and find out more next week.

Very few practitioners are suitably qualified and experienced enough to be capable of producing an accurate PIR, on any kind of installation.

By the way, the OP and the other respondents are not exactly spot-on either.

 

[GaryMo]

By the way, the OP and the other respondents are not exactly spot-on either.

Instead of winking, why not tell us where we're all going wrong?

 

[vera121]

well dingbat put us out of our misery!

 

[dingbat]

Sorry, been offline... busy, busy...

Perhaps I was a tad harsh - most of you are on the right tracks, but in a PIR the observation must be a direct departure from specific regulations, the terminology must be accurate and the recommendation is simply the code number. I see far too many PIRs, which read more like quotations.

3, no main earth from supply company. Code 3 + 1

There is no such thing as a 'main earth'. There is, however, a requirement to connect to a means of earthing via an earthing conductor. A simple Code 1, but the observation should simply be, 'Absence of a proper means of earthing' - there is no place to apportion blame on a PIR.

8, no earth onto metal socket boxes. Code 4

Almost never required and not specified in regulations. Unless it can be verified that screw fixings do not provide a sound electrical connection, then no code necessary.

9, no round 20mm gromits on entry holes to socket boxes and light switch boxes. Code 4

No such requirement. The only mention of the word 'grommet' appears in section 721. No code applicable.

12, no main earth onto central heating pipe work. Code 1

Incorrect terminology. Also no express requirement - this is a misinterpretation of the requirements for main protective bonding, which dates back to the fifteenth. No code required.

14 no suplementery cross bonding bathroom pipe work or radiator. Code 4

More information needed, but under 17th it would warrant noting (using correct reminology, of course) only providing the test condition in 415.2 were not complied with. (Also appears to ignore the complete requirements for supp bonding if necessary. Many sparks seem to forget about bonding to exposed conductive parts; simply bonding together extraneous parts may accomplish nothing useful.)

15 no mains powerd smoke detectors. Code 1

No code. Nothing to do with BS 7671, as most have noted.

17 no RCD protection on lighting circuits as specified 17th edition regs BS July 08. Code 1

No such requirement. However, concealed cable would now be required to be protected, but, as regs are not retrospective, the worst you could give it would be code 4.

18 high earth reading. Code 1

Incorrect terminology and impossible to determine as there is no means of earthing. Had he made specific reference to Zs and maxima, then he'd have a point. As it is the point is already made - along with the point that he doesn't quite understand what he's saying.

 

[vera121]

As I said in my first post this was his words - verbatim, don't shot the messenger!