IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Anyone tried the new NIC online certs\Notification yet.
Topic Summary:
Created On: 17 October 2013 08:16 PM
Status: Post and Reply
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 17 October 2013 08:16 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



antric2

Posts: 1081
Joined: 20 October 2006

Evening,
Just tried to do a MWC on new online NIC system.
Gave up!!! Obviously some probs but I do like the idea of what it is trying to be.
I was doing cert for a circuit addition and alteration via a13A fused RCD spur.
The cert doesnt recognised 13A rating or 7288 RCD BS number.
Anyone else tried it.
Regards
Antric
 17 October 2013 08:35 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



paulskyrme

Posts: 833
Joined: 12 February 2003

Yes, tonight, it is as buggy as hell!
They have had 4, or 5, or 6 emails off me tonight!
I knew about it being released weeks ago, and had a little dabble, but now I have tried to do an EICR in earnest, it is rubbish!
Also no way of creating a template certificate!
 17 October 2013 08:43 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



antric2

Posts: 1081
Joined: 20 October 2006

Originally posted by: paulskyrme

Yes, tonight, it is as buggy as hell!

They have had 4, or 5, or 6 emails off me tonight!

I knew about it being released weeks ago, and had a little dabble, but now I have tried to do an EICR in earnest, it is rubbish!

Also no way of creating a template certificate!


Hiya Paul, I am glad some one else has had a problem.I thought it might be me.
Anyway,got paper ones out and sorted it double quick time.

Looks like they are doing the favourite software trick....put a version out,let people try it and let them find the faults.
 17 October 2013 08:51 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for OMS.
OMS

Posts: 19837
Joined: 23 March 2004

Also no way of creating a template certificate!


There are plenty around Paul - most of those that cross my desk in fact

Well, I assume they are templates, because the have little resemblance to the actual job anyway

Regards

OMS

-------------------------
Failure is always an option
 17 October 2013 09:02 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



24Hour

Posts: 193
Joined: 06 April 2006

I found i kept clicking on the finalise cert beforehand, looks best as a sloopy 1st atempt, could be so good but only time will tell,
Also the box is automaticly clicked for notify building controll even when doing a full comercial instsltion cert ..not domestic !

-------------------------
Yes i do do 24/7 everyday of the FLAMIN year.
 18 October 2013 10:45 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



daveparry1

Posts: 6325
Joined: 04 July 2007

I haven't tried it yet Antric but remember where they ask for the protective device for the modified circuit it's the device at the origin that needs to be entered, eg 32amp for a ring etc. not the value of fuse in the fcu. Just a thought, maybe that's why 13amps isn't catered for in the new software?

Dave.
 18 October 2013 08:39 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



antric2

Posts: 1081
Joined: 20 October 2006

Originally posted by: daveparry1

I haven't tried it yet Antric but remember where they ask for the protective device for the modified circuit it's the device at the origin that needs to be entered, eg 32amp for a ring etc. not the value of fuse in the fcu. Just a thought, maybe that's why 13amps isn't catered for in the new software?



Dave.


Evening Dave,
It was a MWC I was doing.
The conservatory I wired up has had 2 x sockets run off it.I ran a RCD Fused spur with a 13A fuse in it which was spured off a socket ring connection.I call this a Zdb readind and have always thought that it was the supply spur that all the details on the MWC were about.
Does that mean that the protective device is still the one protecting the ring or the one in the spur protecting the spurred circuit that is recorded.
regards
Antric
 18 October 2013 10:52 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



paulskyrme

Posts: 833
Joined: 12 February 2003

Originally posted by: OMS

Also no way of creating a template certificate!


There are plenty around Paul - most of those that cross my desk in fact

Well, I assume they are templates, because the have little resemblance to the actual job anyway

Regards

OMS


Ha ha!

Thing is OMS, I do a lot of certs for a single client, and for exactly the same job, down to the same circuits, so it would save me a lot of time to be able to pre-fill the client data and save, thus then I simply have to fill in the variations in the origin, location, test, data etc.


I had a call back today from a guy called Dan from the NICEIC, apparently, on a Leeds number.
Did not sound like he was from Leeds!

I need to make time to sort through this, as I want to move away from paper certs, and, I can't warrant the expense of dedicated software.
 18 October 2013 11:02 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



daveparry1

Posts: 6325
Joined: 04 July 2007

Yes Antric as I understand it the one that protects the ring is the one they're asking about, never seems quite right to me but i've never been pulled on it at assessments. I always mention it on the cert. eg, extension to ring circuit supplied via fused connection unit etc.

Dave.
 18 October 2013 11:59 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



antric2

Posts: 1081
Joined: 20 October 2006

Originally posted by: daveparry1

Yes Antric as I understand it the one that protects the ring is the one they're asking about, never seems quite right to me but i've never been pulled on it at assessments. I always mention it on the cert. eg, extension to ring circuit supplied via fused connection unit etc.



Dave.


Which is quite a point of the moment for me because I have always put on my MWC when doing a circuit via a FCU the 13A rating and BS number of the 7288 RCD and have never been pulled on that or corrected.......which leads me to what I mean by point of the moment for me.
I had my annual NIC assessment this week which was my 7th.
Again, after doing the required tests was told of a differing way in which it might be best to do do my testing which again has contradicted other assessors methods.
I must admit, the guy I had this week was a smashing, helpfull bloke just like the majority of them are and I actually agree with a couple of things he mentioned and I will address a couple of his points to good effect.
But the fact you and I ,Dave . have put differing info on certs and yet we both have not been queried about it shows how different interpretation is when we are assessed. We cant both be right on this or can we!!
Regards
Antric
 20 October 2013 05:53 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for kj scott.
kj scott

Posts: 2144
Joined: 02 April 2006

Originally posted by: antric2

It was a MWC I was doing.

The conservatory I wired up has had 2 x sockets run off it.I ran a RCD Fused spur with a 13A fuse in it which was spured off a socket ring connection.I call this a Zdb readind and have always thought that it was the supply spur that all the details on the MWC were about.

Zdb is not defined in BS 7671; but was always used on NICEIC assessment reports to indicate a sample test Zs at a distribution board; or a sample Zs at the origin with parallel paths connected.

Does that mean that the protective device is still the one protecting the ring or the one in the spur protecting the spurred circuit that is recorded.

The protective device details to be recorded in part 2 of the MEIWC are those for the device protecting the altered final circuit. In the case of an alteration to a ring final circuit that would be the BS EN 60898, 61009, 1361/1 etc.

regards

Antric


-------------------------
http://www.niceic.biz
 20 October 2013 06:20 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



daveparry1

Posts: 6325
Joined: 04 July 2007

The question asks about the protective device for the modified circuit, NOT the modified part of the circuit!

Dave.
 20 October 2013 06:41 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for kj scott.
kj scott

Posts: 2144
Joined: 02 April 2006

Thats what I said Dave.

-------------------------
http://www.niceic.biz
 20 October 2013 06:44 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



daveparry1

Posts: 6325
Joined: 04 July 2007

So you did KJ, my apologies!
 20 October 2013 06:52 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for kj scott.
kj scott

Posts: 2144
Joined: 02 April 2006

It no different to the device details in columns 3-5 of the schedule of test results. You don't record fused connection units there either.

-------------------------
http://www.niceic.biz
 21 October 2013 01:26 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 11679
Joined: 13 August 2003

remember where they ask for the protective device for the modified circuit it's the device at the origin that needs to be entered, eg 32amp for a ring etc. not the value of fuse in the fcu. Just a thought, maybe that's why 13amps isn't catered for in the new software?

So what if you added an extra socket to an existing fused spur?

It no different to the device details in columns 3-5 of the schedule of test results. You don't record fused connection units there either.

some of us do

- Andy.
Statistics

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.