Landlords electric question-busbars and distribution boards

knightstyle

http://i1040.photobucket.com/albums/b403/mycaravan/123781659_zpstt9zwsxo.jpg

Here is a pic of a consumer unit, the plastic cover with the triangular warning on it is the bus bar cover and the electrician is correct in saying it MUST be in position to cover the live bus bars. Is the cover lying on top of the unit or somewhere? Seems silly to replace the whole unit just for this.
Plus as others have said NEW units must be metal buy this is not a reason to replace an existing undamaged unit.

MobileSaver

knightstyle wrote: »

the electrician is correct in saying it MUST be in position to cover the live bus bars

Please can you tell me exactly which part of the IET Wiring Regulations states an existing consumer unit must have a busbar cover?

knightstyle

Have a look at BS EN 61439-3:2012 Low-voltage switchgear and controlgear I am sure it is in there.
Plus under the general HSE risk assessment I would think it unsafe as the dist. board cover is removable without a special tool.
Long time since I was involved in this but the rules have tightened up, not relaxed since then.

G_M

MobileSaver wrote: »

Please can you tell me exactly which part of the IET Wiring Regulations states an existing consumer unit must have a busbar cover?

The fact that this property is let is surely also relevant. LL's have a general duty to ensure the tenants' safety. Were a tenant to be electrocuted as a result of touching/fiddling with the CU, could the LL be calpable due to the lack of busbar cover......?

I don't know the answer but throw the Q out there.

MobileSaver

knightstyle wrote: »

Have a look at BS EN 61439-3:2012

The Regs Amendment 3 (which refers to consumer units having to comply with BS EN 61439-3) only applies to new installations or when replacing old consumer units, it does not apply to existing consumer units.

G_M wrote: »

Were a tenant to be electrocuted as a result of touching/fiddling with the CU,

The only way this could happen would be if the "fiddling" involved removing the consumer unit cover. Of course, as mentioned previously, as soon as the cover is removed then there are 101 ways to electrocute yourself, touching the exposed busbar being just one of them!

I know you are playing devil's advocate but I suppose yes some lawyer somewhere would probably try to make a claim even in such a ludicrous case. Anyway, as Mutton Geoff stated, a strip of insulation tape negates that issue without any need to replace the entire consumer unit.

Owain_Moneysaver

knightstyle wrote: »

Plus under the general HSE risk assessment I would think it unsafe as the dist. board cover is removable without a special tool.

It shouldn't be.

societys_child

knightstyle wrote: »

http://i1040.photobucket.com/albums/b403/mycaravan/123781659_zpstt9zwsxo.jpg

Here is a pic of a consumer unit, the plastic cover with the triangular warning on it is the bus bar cover

A generic photo of a CU with the front cover removed, and the busbar cover in place? Not sure what your point is?

board cover is removable without a special tool.

The screw holes, for the screws which hold the front cover in place are clearly visible - to the left and to the right . . . someone's removed the screws using a tool, to remove the front cover and take the photo.

marc3

thanks all for taking the trouble to reply.

F8photo

MobileSaver wrote: »

Please can you tell me exactly which part of the IET Wiring Regulations states an existing consumer unit must have a busbar cover?

Look at barriers and enclosures.......

There is no requirement to upgrade to a metal consumer unit provided that all the requirements for RCD protection are met. The RCD is a far more important safety feature for both people and property!

If I were doing the EICR [Electrical installation condition report] then I would certainly class the missing busbar cover as a code 2 and unsatisfactory. Far too easy to get a belt off a big chunk of live copper. Its why they ALL come fitted with one and the same reason that the main incoming terminals have a similar barrier. Not a big issue to sort tho....