IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: replacing a fuse board what tests required
Topic Summary: fuse board change
Created On: 27 March 2006 10:32 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.
 27 March 2006 10:32 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sparkyleclec

Posts: 25
Joined: 29 September 2004

can anyone tell me to comply with part p when changing a fuse board what would the niceic test and to what level ie would they do complete tests prior to changing a board to check all is in order prior to starting or would they be able to change the board then test and report on any problems on the test sheet.Would a complete test be carried out as if it was an installation cert or would this be excessive as you are not respondsible for things that you cannot see ie under floors walls etc can someone with niceie status enlighten me on this matter thanks
 27 March 2006 11:25 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



electricman

Posts: 830
Joined: 17 November 2005

hi
there are various opinions on here as to your predicament
some do a cu change and then do a pir- this is strictly speaking wrong as you are messing with circuit design.
some do a cu change and then do an EIC- this is strictly speaking wrong also as you cant fail the install AND you cant see all the cable runs and joints- you do adopt the circuits and are responsible for them.
some do the cu change and do no paperwork-this is a ditto....

our opinion is the same as the nic- a cu change is a no-no as it triggers an EIC and you cant honestly tick some of the boxes on the inspection schedule. i have stated this before and have been lambasted in the past bit i/ they are correct .......
CU change=rewire, strictly speaking... for those who wont agree to this , you are replacing the circuit protection on a circuit up to 45 years old if its pvc. there is plenty of work out there without getting involved in this type of work.

if you are working on a house with a full cu the answer is simple-fit a new unit adj to the old one and henley block it...
hope this helps...
( pulling on my hard hat now!)

PS- i believe the ECA have done a cu change certificate to address this problem , not seen it, has anyone?

-------------------------
"You're a crackpot till you hit the jackpot!"
Werner Von Braun 1969

Edited: 27 March 2006 at 11:26 PM by electricman
 28 March 2006 07:55 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



lbelectrics

Posts: 1035
Joined: 26 October 2004

quote:

( pulling on my hard hat now!)


Not at all electricman, I agree with your points.

What amazes me is that customers stil expect you to replace a C/U for under £200!
Of course, there are those that will. I quoted recently £400 knowing that there were issues with the
existing installation an got a look of horror from the customer in question.
While there are still cowboys out there, this will continue to happen.

-------------------------
Regards

Lee
 28 March 2006 08:14 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



modalconfusion1

Posts: 91
Joined: 28 February 2006

As a small contractor I am asked to do this work quite often,this type of work more often than not will also normally include an installation upgrade. I usually issue a EIC and on page 2 where it says "Comments on existing installation" quanify exactly what I have done and issue a seperate sheet of any deviations that have been noted during my inspection and testing. I haven't had any grief off the NIC with this method to date.
 28 March 2006 02:28 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Tasslehoff

Posts: 33
Joined: 09 December 2005

quote:

Originally posted by: electricman

our opinion is the same as the nic- a cu change is a no-no as it triggers an EIC and you cant honestly tick some of the boxes on the inspection schedule. i have stated this before and have been lambasted in the past bit i/ they are correct .......
CU change=rewire, strictly speaking... for those who wont agree to this , you are replacing the circuit protection on a circuit up to 45 years old if its pvc. there is plenty of work out there without getting involved in this type of work.



In the past when i have spoken to the NICEIC tech line and to our NIC area enginner they have both said do it on a PIR but we must rectify any code 1 and code 2 faults and where as i can see your point on hidden cables then surely that means you can not do a minor works as well

Edited: 28 March 2006 at 02:33 PM by Tasslehoff
 28 March 2006 09:58 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mikespark

Posts: 307
Joined: 06 November 2005

Its totally daft to suggest that you can't change a CU without doing it as part of a complete rewire. Whoever says this is not living in the real world. A CU upgrade is often a very worthwhile improvement to an exixting installation providing the opportunity to use MCB's, split load board with sockets on RCD as well as to provide for additional circuits as demanded for such things as mains operated smoke alarms etc.
I have previously on occasion added a second CU via Henley block where there was a need for more circuits and for one reason or another it was undesirable to delve too far into the existing. This IS a practical solution but not entirely desirable for obvious "ease of use" reasons.
I have just been reading a NAPIT publication on the matter of replacing CU's and how to deal with the paperwork and they are suggesting that you do a EIC annotated to say that it only covers the new CU and issue a PIR to cover the rest of the installation. I'm not sure that I agree with this and in any case I would want to do the PIR FIRST. How else can you know that you are not about to open a can of worms, and how else can you collect the necessary measurements to specify the appropriate CPD's etc?
 28 March 2006 11:29 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for bazza.
bazza

Posts: 533
Joined: 31 March 2005

mikespark, I'm a NAPIT fella too. is there a link to that publication or could you PM it to me?

Thanks

Bazza
 29 March 2006 12:02 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



electricman

Posts: 830
Joined: 17 November 2005

quote:

Originally posted by: mikespark
Its totally daft to suggest that you can't change a CU without doing it as part of a complete rewire. Whoever says this is not living in the real world. A CU upgrade is often a very worthwhile improvement to an exixting installation providing the opportunity to use MCB's, split load board with sockets on RCD as well as to provide for additional circuits as demanded for such things as mains operated smoke alarms etc.
I have previously on occasion added a second CU via Henley block where there was a need for more circuits and for one reason or another it was undesirable to delve too far into the existing. This IS a practical solution but not entirely desirable for obvious "ease of use" reasons.
I have just been reading a NAPIT publication on the matter of replacing CU's and how to deal with the paperwork and they are suggesting that you do a EIC annotated to say that it only covers the new CU and issue a PIR to cover the rest of the installation. I'm not sure that I agree with this and in any case I would want to do the PIR FIRST. How else can you know that you are not about to open a can of worms, and how else can you collect the necessary measurements to specify the appropriate CPD's etc?



Hi mike
i dont do CU changes as I DO live in the real world. you say it is a worthwile upgrade but you could connect something dangerous. when in court for a house fire fatality, you cant say you were doin the customer a favour-YOU WERE THE LAST MAN ON IT- you imply that if you cant see the problem, therefore its not a problem-not so...
Napit are making it up by saying do an EIC on the board and a PIR on the install, this infers that code 1s are ok to connect to your install of new CU-dont think that would go down too well at court...you say you agree with this and that is fair enough but what about the defects you cannot see or find by test....again you imply" if i cant see it then thats ok"-not so

for me personally, the only circumstance in which i would consider this sort of work would be a nice job with a valid EIC and periodics- or as it says in GN3 " charts, diagrams, tables and previous recordsprovided " then i would chance doing it but otherwise NO CHANCE!

every one who runs with this argument cannot really be that short of work, im not accepting this, as there is currently a 100.000 man shortage in the industry...

-------------------------
"You're a crackpot till you hit the jackpot!"
Werner Von Braun 1969
 29 March 2006 12:16 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



electricman

Posts: 830
Joined: 17 November 2005

quote:

Originally posted by: Tasslehoff



In the past when i have spoken to the NICEIC tech line and to our NIC area enginner they have both said do it on a PIR but we must rectify any code 1 and code 2 faults and where as i can see your point on hidden cables then surely that means you can not do a minor works as well


this is pretty sensible, maybe the way forward to marry the paperwork to the work done, not quite right though as you have a new design element involved- i think the powers that be should address this issue properly. has anyone seen this ECA CU change form , that i have heard mooted around....
so even the nic cannot sing from the same hymn sheet- our man says nooooooooooooo!
on the minor works issue , by definition you are adding to existing cct. this is ok if it is rough/ hidden as the paperwork reflects this " adding to an existing circuit"

-------------------------
"You're a crackpot till you hit the jackpot!"
Werner Von Braun 1969

Edited: 29 March 2006 at 12:21 AM by electricman
 29 March 2006 07:08 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sparky100

Posts: 9
Joined: 12 February 2006

We have recently secured a contract in the North for a Housing Association to replace all their electrical accessories and replace the cu. I have been instructed by my boss to complete a Domestic EIC form (NIC). The post on this thread have now confused me greatly. Should I continue with this or do a PIR as well?

-------------------------
Electrician working around the east anglian area
 29 March 2006 08:43 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



deleted_stoneman

Posts: 12
Joined: 01 June 2004

Here is my opinion.
If asked to do a CU change I first do a FULL PIR - in other words every point/outlet to identify any potential deviations from BS7671 or anything remotely unsafe (eg rubberwiring). I then correct any deviations including circuit rewires if neccessary before changing the CU. then change the CU and redo all tests noting on the EIC that tests prove circuits OK but inspection is limited to visible wiring.

paul
 29 March 2006 09:05 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mikespark

Posts: 307
Joined: 06 November 2005

Stoneman.
I'm agreeing with YOU. Thats why I said I would do the PIR FIRST. It follows in my way of thinking anyway, that if you do a PIR and find significant defects then you MUST fix them before changing the CU. To do otherwise would be totally irresponsible.
electricman, hope this clarifies your point also.
Bazza
Look in the latest issue (March 06) of "Competent Person" (whoever dreamed up that title should be dragged out and shot). "Ask Eddie" P13.
 29 March 2006 02:01 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



circle

Posts: 36
Joined: 29 March 2006

Hi folks,
I've only just registered although i have looked at various threads in the past .
I've just got off the phone with niceic helpline concerning replacing a cu.
this one has a burnt/damaged fuse way with old stranded pvc cabling.
lighting circuits have no cpc and class 1 in use.
the owner is in her 70's and cannot afford a rewire at this time
i was told that i could replace this provided class 1 fittings are replaced by class2-since it was a safety issue.
in the past i have always done eic's for cu replacements but have stated that this was for replacement cu only- I do think that we need to be sensible about this - so long as the installation is not in a worse state when we leave any improvement would help.
 29 March 2006 03:20 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



TeesdaleSpark

Posts: 662
Joined: 12 November 2004

When I did my C&G 2391 course we were told that a major alteration would necessitate an EIC and a PIR. If I remember correctly this question came up on a number of previous exam papers. This makes sense to me. If I were to do a consumer unit change myself I would follow NAPITs line i.e. EIC for the consumer unit and a PIR for the circuits.

In an ideal world you would do a PIR first but if you did then you would have to repeat much of the testing after fitting the consumer unit which is starting to make things expensive. I've not changed consumer units while working for myself but done it working for other people. When I did this an EIC was the only paper work issued.

Having said all that does it really matter what paper work is done as long as you do the job properly.
 29 March 2006 04:55 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Tasslehoff

Posts: 33
Joined: 09 December 2005

quote:

Originally posted by: electricman

on the minor works issue , by definition you are adding to existing cct. this is ok if it is rough/ hidden as the paperwork reflects this " adding to an existing circuit"

The point I'm trying to make with regards to minor works is that you take responcibility for the circuit it the same way you would when changing a CU, you still need to make sure the circuit is safe to alter but you can't see whats in the walls and under the floors to inspect the existing part of the circuit. I know a PIR takes this into account but A EIC nor a Minor works doesn't. But surely you still can't be expect to take responcibility for things you can't see and don't show up by testing.

I've edited this message 3 time now if there are any more mistake i just don't care.

Edited: 29 March 2006 at 04:59 PM by Tasslehoff
 29 March 2006 06:25 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for mapj1.
mapj1

Posts: 3419
Joined: 22 July 2004

Well, although the standard forms don't cover it neatly, the precedent in other areas for your guarantee covering only your work is sound. I think we all agree that garages don't have to be liable for siezed brakes just because they were the last to check the antifreeze, and suspect they will tell you they are not even liable if the last thing they did was to check the brake fluid levels.

I would say that this situation is similar. What you do need to do with your paper work is spell out in black and white that you are not responsible for any pre-existing defects, (only the new ones you introduce...).
You will make reasonable efforts to point out any defect you spot while you are in there, as a matter of professionalism, but this does not constitute blind adoption of responsibilty for someone else's unseen wiring. If this were not the case you would not dare change light bulb from 60W to 100W without a re-wire, as you could not guarantee what workmanship was behind it.

The fact the job is a CU swap is not really particularly relevant to that principle except insofar as you need the new CU and circuit breakers to be at least as suitable for the installation what it was replacing (no 32A breaker for the lights that used to be 5A hot wire then).

The 'fit two CUs and a henley' is no different in terms of the 'last man in carries the can' argument, as you are still altering a supply shared with existing wiring. It may or may not involve less testing, depending on your scruples, that is all.
Well that's my reading of the rules.
regards M.

-------------------------
regards Mike
 29 March 2006 11:54 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



deleted_gaz58

Posts: 144
Joined: 13 October 2005

743 ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS
743-01-02 The contractor or other person responsible for the new work, or a person authorised to act on their behalf, shall record on the EIC or the MWC any defects found, so far as is reasonably practicable, in the existing installation,

The regs as we know are vague in places but I don.t think you need to bring everything in line with BS7671 when changing a CU. If the bonding is up to scratch and the circuits you have worked on test out ok then you can Record on the EIC any defects found. You have done your best as far as is reasonably practicable
If however you were carrying out a rewire then 742 would apply and you must bring the whole install in line with BS7671

742 INITIAL VERIFICATION
742-01-04 Defects or omissions revealed during inspection and testing of the installation work covered by Certificate (EIC) shall be made good before the Certificate is issued.
 30 March 2006 09:21 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for tomgunn.
tomgunn

Posts: 3250
Joined: 25 May 2005

all fo thi sworry about changing a CCU... hahaha.... I understand your concerns regarding all of the crap associated with the I&Testing but come on lads... it aint rocket science and to say that you wouldnt do a CCU change over quite baffles me... really... take alook around the house.... any visual probs?... put a tester on the tails with all circuits on and see what readings you get... bloody hell... be confident.. if you do your checks then there wont be a problem... be brave!

-------------------------
Tom .... ( The TERMINATOR ).

handyTRADESMAN ... haha

Castle Builders

Why did Nick Clegg cross the road? Because he said he wouldn't!

I can resist anything..... except temptation! ( Karl Gunn ).
Statistics

See Also:



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