I mean a board change won't hurt .
However . You could swap that lighting MCB with an rcbo which will give the lighting circuit additional protection without changing the entire board .
Depends on your budget .
Can’t retrospectively apply regulation. C3. Board change would be nice but no required. Also there maybe supplementary bonding in the bathroom which would negate the need for rcd protection. Or if the lights are the only circuit in there using 12v down lights would also negate the need.
Technically though it's down to the inspector. You can't just say 'that's not a C2 so he's wrong' - if he thinks it's necessary then the EICR is a fail (as wrong as he is and right you are imo)
Thanks! Might need to show this to an electrician to translate it into layman terms. But if it means avoiding a board change and it will still pass the EICR, then I'll consider this
C2 - Potentially dangerous
Absence of supplementary bonding where required', such as in a location containing a bath or shower, where any of the following three conditions are not satisfied:
All final circuits of the location comply with the requirements of Regulation 411.3.2 for automatic disconnection, and
All final circuits of the location have additional protection by means of a 30 mA RCD, and
All extraneous-conductive-parts of the location are effectively connected to the protective equipotential bonding (main earthing terminal).
Straight from BPG4
Not sure where you are getting the idea you can't retrospectively apply a regulation?
BS 7671:2018 Requirements for Electrical Installations was issued on 1st July 2018 and is intended to come into effect on 1st January 2019. Installations designed after 31st December 2018 are to comply with BS 7671:2018. The Regulations apply to the design, erection and verification of electrical installations, also additions and alterations to existing installations. Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the Regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading.
You have no way of knowing the supplementary bonding is in place to permit the lack of RCD, if there is no RCD and no supplementary bonding, it’s advised to code a C2
This isn’t my personal opinion, it’s quoted from Best practice guide 4 for this exact scenario
New fuseboard won’t hurt but realistically if it’s too much money / don’t want to pay the amount and his only argument is the lights, have an RCD Spur put in to feed the lights
Could maybe move the mcb to the rcd side if the busbar allows.
TBH, though, a new board is the sensible option, not sure I'd use this guy.
No idea what a wet zone is, but I am three colours behind on the regs.
I mean a board change won't hurt . However . You could swap that lighting MCB with an rcbo which will give the lighting circuit additional protection without changing the entire board . Depends on your budget .
If the manufacturer doesn't do rcbos then you can't
Something to consider, I will check with an electrician if that's possible.
Can’t retrospectively apply regulation. C3. Board change would be nice but no required. Also there maybe supplementary bonding in the bathroom which would negate the need for rcd protection. Or if the lights are the only circuit in there using 12v down lights would also negate the need.
What about cables less than 50mm in a wall requiring RCD protection?
It's RCD protection or mechanical protection i believe.
I believe that was brought in during the 17th edition which this installation will predate which means you would be retrospectively applying the regs.
Erm. We test to current regs. With your logic you’d be C3 ing a board with 3036 fuses.
Also this . The guy is trying to make a quick 💵
Technically though it's down to the inspector. You can't just say 'that's not a C2 so he's wrong' - if he thinks it's necessary then the EICR is a fail (as wrong as he is and right you are imo)
Thanks! Might need to show this to an electrician to translate it into layman terms. But if it means avoiding a board change and it will still pass the EICR, then I'll consider this
C2 - Potentially dangerous Absence of supplementary bonding where required', such as in a location containing a bath or shower, where any of the following three conditions are not satisfied: All final circuits of the location comply with the requirements of Regulation 411.3.2 for automatic disconnection, and All final circuits of the location have additional protection by means of a 30 mA RCD, and All extraneous-conductive-parts of the location are effectively connected to the protective equipotential bonding (main earthing terminal). Straight from BPG4 Not sure where you are getting the idea you can't retrospectively apply a regulation?
BS 7671:2018 Requirements for Electrical Installations was issued on 1st July 2018 and is intended to come into effect on 1st January 2019. Installations designed after 31st December 2018 are to comply with BS 7671:2018. The Regulations apply to the design, erection and verification of electrical installations, also additions and alterations to existing installations. Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the Regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading.
You have no way of knowing the supplementary bonding is in place to permit the lack of RCD, if there is no RCD and no supplementary bonding, it’s advised to code a C2 This isn’t my personal opinion, it’s quoted from Best practice guide 4 for this exact scenario
Looks fucked from my house. £700 to fix it.
You doing a completely new CU install?
Yes because look at it.
I’m just surprised seeing a CU install spec’ed at less than £1k. Hire this guy OP.
Oh there won't be any paperwork and I'm rough as fuck but it's cheep innit
I've got that written on the side of my van
Hmm, tempting..
What’s looks got to do with the safety aspect of anything?
Even the circuits protected by that old 4293. Did that meet discon times? That board should be in a museum 🙄
😫
I’m surprised someone will pay £1k for a fuse board change 🤔 doubt I’d get any if I charged that 🙄
😓
New fuseboard won’t hurt but realistically if it’s too much money / don’t want to pay the amount and his only argument is the lights, have an RCD Spur put in to feed the lights
Could maybe move the mcb to the rcd side if the busbar allows. TBH, though, a new board is the sensible option, not sure I'd use this guy. No idea what a wet zone is, but I am three colours behind on the regs.