How to CoC a changeover switch??

[deejaypsy]

It was explained to me that the only way that you can be sure that the existing installation complies with the general safety principles and is reasonably safe, is to inspect it. I mean that makes sense.
Furthermore, I was told that the only way you could prove that the existing installation complies with the general safety principles and is reasonably safe is by issuing a certificate.
Look at it this way, the regulation is clear that you will be taking responsibility for the entire installation, that much cannot be disputed, so why not inspect it all, and be sure your not going to end up in court?

Could you point out where it states that you will be taking responsibility for the ENTIRE installation if you were to, say, install only 1 extra light point in a 3 storey, 8 bedroom house??
Surely this interpretation of yours of the regs (and might i add, that the SA regs leave a lot to personal interpretation) is insane if you figure the costs involved to the client if this were true!
1 extra light point to install....R650....Coc for entire installation...couple of grand!!
You'd never get any work if you quoted this way!
I do understand your way of thinking and interpreting the regs, but it does not make any logical sense to issue a CoC for the entire installation if you are only working on a small part of it!
I would like the ECB or ECA to answer this question for us as they would be the guys pointing the finger if it were to go to court would they not??

[Sparks]

"Reasonably safe" What is it? This question has been hanging in the air forever. The ELCB trips withing range, all socket oulets are protected, the geyser is earthed, the stove is earthed, all motor circuits have ELCB protection. What else is required to classify an installation as "reasonably safe? Is this a full inspection?

[ACEsterhuizen]

It should not be but it is.... I also interpret it the same as Leecat, but in most cases the financial hurdle is massive, and often just not possible.

[ACEsterhuizen]

That's right, it says in the regulations: "9.(2)(c)(i) the existing part of the electrical installation complies with the general safety principles of such standard and is reasonably safe"
This does not imply a full inspection and ensuring that the whole installation complies as per reg 5(1).

Its true sparks but it does say: " complies with the general safety principles of such standard and is reasonably safe"

So firstly it HAS to comply with the general safety principle of such standards (sans 10142 is our standards) and the "general safety principles" are specifically referred to in our standards on page 69 of our regs:

"5 Fundamental requirements
NOTE This clause contains the general safety principles applicable to electrical
installations."

[Sparks]

Love the can of worms
With a full inspection you are required to throw the book at the installation.
To satisfy yourself that it is reasonable safe you are only required to see that there is not any imminent danger through normal daily usage of the installation.
Earth continuity readings, for example, to each and every socket outlet are not required if all the plugs are fed from a working ELCB
That would classify as "compliance".
If "compliance" were the aim "reasonably safe" would be redundant in the regs.

[Leecatt]

Love the can of worms
With a full inspection you are required to throw the book at the installation.
To satisfy yourself that it is reasonable safe you are only required to see that there is not any imminent danger through normal daily usage of the installation.
Earth continuity readings, for example, to each and every socket outlet are not required if all the plugs are fed from a working ELCB
That would classify as "compliance".
If "compliance" were the aim "reasonably safe" would be redundant in the regs.

I'm going to re read section 5 because I think I may be missing something here. 😩

[Sparks]

I see this thread has had over 700 views, come on guys, share your thoughts. How do you see it? We plod along in the direction we were pointed, but sometimes we end up on the wrong path.

[AndyD]

I can only speak from the commercial side, we don't CoC the entire installation when we install a new control panel or circuit, in my humble opinion it would be unreasonable to expect it and unreasonable to expect the customer to pay thousands extra. We do however run the usual safety tests on the DB that's supplying our system, we check earth impedances, N-E voltage and general supply integrity etc.

[ACEsterhuizen]

i don understand where is the confusion. The law is clear:

Issuing of certificate of compliance
9.
(1) No person other than a registered person may issue a certificate of compliance. THE POINT IS CLEAR.

(2) A registered person may issue a certificate of compliance accompanied by the required test report only after having satisfied himself or herself by means of an inspection and test that (CLEAR POINT.)

(a)a new electrical installation complies with the provisions of regulation 5(1) and was carried out under his or her general control; or (CLEAR POINT)

(b)an electrical installation which existed prior to the publication of the current edition of the health and safety standard incorporated into these Regulations in terms of regulation 5(1), complies with the general safety principles of such standard; or (on page 69 clause 5 of our regulation book) (VERY CLEAR)

(c)an electrical installation referred to in paragraph (b), to which extensions or alterations have been effected, that

(i) the existing part of the electrical installation complies with the general safety principles of such standard and is reasonably safe, and (CLEAR POINTS: MUST COMPLY TO CLAUSE 5 AND BE REASONABLY SAFE)

(ii) the extensions or alterations effected comply with the provisions of regulation 5(1) and were carried out under his or her general control.

ABOVE STATEMENTS MAKES IT CLEAR WHEN YOU CAN ISSUE A COC AND WHAT CRITERIA MUST BE MET.

(3)If at any time prior to the issuing of a certificate of compliance any fault or defect is detected in any part of the electrical installation, the registered person shall refuse to issue such certificate until that fault or defect has been rectified: Provided that if such fault or defect in the opinion of the registered person constitutes an immediate danger to persons in a case where electricity is already supplied, he or she shall forthwith take steps to disconnect the supply to the circuit in which the fault or defect was detected and notify the chief inspector thereof.

(4)Any person who undertakes to do electrical installation work shall ensure that a valid certificate of compliance is issued for that work.

(5)No person may amend a certificate of compliance.

[ians]

IF i had to test the entire installation of every installation i work on, very few properties would pass a COC inspection.

I put my blinkers on and take my chances like the the majority of contractors and inspectors in SA. You cant police and industry if you dont have a structure in place to enforce the laws.

Just a word of warning listening to the person who's building collapsed, BEWARE of people who say just sign it over or threaten you as an inspector that you will loose your job if you dont turn a blind eye. This court case going on in Durban is a good example of how people will use you and promise you the world until the sh!t hits the fan. Then turn on you when they are put in firing line. There are no friends when it comes to your signature on a piece of paper.