IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: EMMA SHAW CASE
Topic Summary: Result of the Court case
Created On: 31 March 2014 04:35 PM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - John Peckham - 31 March 2014 04:35 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - John Peckham - 31 March 2014 05:19 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 31 March 2014 05:23 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 31 March 2014 05:26 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - John Peckham - 31 March 2014 05:30 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - impvan - 31 March 2014 05:31 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - rocknroll - 31 March 2014 05:46 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - perspicacious - 31 March 2014 06:02 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - jcm256 - 31 March 2014 06:03 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - aligarjon - 31 March 2014 08:21 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - jcm256 - 31 March 2014 08:53 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - aligarjon - 31 March 2014 10:26 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - sparkingchip - 31 March 2014 11:54 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - antric2 - 01 April 2014 12:40 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Zoro - 01 April 2014 09:23 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - davezawadi - 01 April 2014 10:57 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 01 April 2014 11:17 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - mapj1 - 01 April 2014 12:41 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - antric2 - 01 April 2014 12:46 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - aligarjon - 01 April 2014 08:07 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 01 April 2014 09:15 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - weirdbeard - 01 April 2014 03:27 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 01 April 2014 11:15 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 01 April 2014 11:36 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 01 April 2014 12:23 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - phantom9 - 01 April 2014 01:14 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 01 April 2014 01:43 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 01 April 2014 01:22 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - davezawadi - 01 April 2014 02:14 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - ennel - 01 April 2014 07:07 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Zoro - 02 April 2014 10:20 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - weirdbeard - 01 April 2014 03:21 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 01 April 2014 03:28 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 01 April 2014 03:15 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 01 April 2014 03:27 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - John Peckham - 01 April 2014 03:36 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - phantom9 - 02 April 2014 09:05 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - phantom9 - 02 April 2014 09:10 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 02 April 2014 10:16 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - sparkingchip - 02 April 2014 12:00 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - phantom9 - 02 April 2014 06:57 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 02 April 2014 09:15 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - phantom9 - 02 April 2014 09:21 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 02 April 2014 09:38 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - mapj1 - 02 April 2014 10:26 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 02 April 2014 12:06 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 02 April 2014 12:14 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - mapj1 - 02 April 2014 01:20 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 02 April 2014 01:50 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 02 April 2014 03:04 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 02 April 2014 04:13 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - GeoffBlackwell - 02 April 2014 04:22 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - rocknroll - 02 April 2014 04:26 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 02 April 2014 05:50 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - phantom9 - 02 April 2014 06:36 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Zuiko - 02 April 2014 07:02 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - geoffsd - 02 April 2014 07:33 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 02 April 2014 08:24 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - phantom9 - 02 April 2014 11:38 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - mawry - 03 April 2014 02:39 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - briandoherty - 06 April 2014 06:09 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Zs - 07 April 2014 07:27 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - mawry - 08 April 2014 11:13 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - mikejumper - 08 April 2014 07:46 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - napitprofessional - 09 April 2014 12:06 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Zoro - 09 April 2014 10:50 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - napitprofessional - 09 April 2014 02:01 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 02 April 2014 08:23 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Parsley - 02 April 2014 10:30 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - electricman - 02 April 2014 11:06 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - ericmark - 03 April 2014 02:37 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Zoro - 04 April 2014 09:20 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - John Peckham - 06 April 2014 03:53 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - electricman - 08 April 2014 11:19 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - AJJewsbury - 08 April 2014 11:23 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - mikejumper - 09 April 2014 04:42 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 09 April 2014 05:14 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - psychicwarrior - 10 April 2014 08:56 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - napitprofessional - 11 April 2014 05:54 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - davezawadi - 12 April 2014 11:46 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - sparkingchip - 12 April 2014 12:33 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - John Peckham - 12 April 2014 01:21 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - weirdbeard - 12 April 2014 06:28 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - sparkingchip - 12 April 2014 06:51 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - weirdbeard - 12 April 2014 08:11 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - sparkingchip - 12 April 2014 10:57 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - phantom9 - 12 April 2014 04:02 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Grobbyman - 12 April 2014 05:44 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Zoro - 12 April 2014 06:11 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Fm - 12 April 2014 11:26 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - sparkingchip - 12 April 2014 11:37 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - Fm - 12 April 2014 11:40 PM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - sparkingchip - 13 April 2014 12:04 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - phantom9 - 13 April 2014 09:25 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - OMS - 14 April 2014 10:13 AM  
 EMMA SHAW CASE   - potential - 14 April 2014 10:32 AM  
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 31 March 2014 08:53 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



jcm256

Posts: 2327
Joined: 01 April 2006

Yes you could be right, but the fact ticking a box that there was one when in fact there was not, was it a guess without checking we don't know.
 31 March 2014 10:26 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



aligarjon

Posts: 4053
Joined: 09 September 2005

yes it sounds like he didn't even go into the property. i suspect it goes on all the time.

Gary

-------------------------
Specialised Subject. The Bleedin Obvious. John Cleese
 31 March 2014 11:54 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sparkingchip

Posts: 11682
Joined: 18 January 2003

 01 April 2014 12:40 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



antric2

Posts: 1267
Joined: 20 October 2006

With ref; to the RCD box being ticked for a non present RCD,
I upgraded a consumer unit some 3 or 4 years ago at a house just after a bathroom refit that had had a small con unit fitted with no RCD protection.
The cert had ticked the RCD present box but upon my testing was getting >310ms.
Where was the RCD in question I thought that was not operating correctly\gone faulty.
Phoned the electrician (Niceic Approved) who issued cert to ask where RCD was."It is an RCBO "he said...."No it isnt" I replied at which he replied that he had told his collegue to order and fit an RCBO .
When I asked him to explain how and why the x1 and x5 test had been recorded at 18ms he replied that all Hagar RCBO,s were 18ms trip time and that was that.....I was quite surprised at his audacity and flippant manner.

The customer was fuming,complained to the bathroom company....no joy....customer complained to NICEIC and because I had done the consumer unit and integrated the bathroom circuit onto my new RCD board would not take action.

This was one the installer had been caught out with but how many more guestimated certs of his are out there!!! NIC were not interested about that.
Regards
Antric
 01 April 2014 09:23 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zoro

Posts: 300
Joined: 31 July 2011

Originally posted by: antric2

With ref; to the RCD box being ticked for a non present RCD,

I upgraded a consumer unit some 3 or 4 years ago at a house just after a bathroom refit that had had a small con unit fitted with no RCD protection.

The cert had ticked the RCD present box but upon my testing was getting >310ms.

Where was the RCD in question I thought that was not operating correctly\gone faulty.

Phoned the electrician (Niceic Approved) who issued cert to ask where RCD was."It is an RCBO "he said...."No it isnt" I replied at which he replied that he had told his collegue to order and fit an RCBO .

When I asked him to explain how and why the x1 and x5 test had been recorded at 18ms he replied that all Hagar RCBO,s were 18ms trip time and that was that.....I was quite surprised at his audacity and flippant manner.

The customer was fuming,complained to the bathroom company....no joy....customer complained to NICEIC and because I had done the consumer unit and integrated the bathroom circuit onto my new RCD board would not take action.


This was one the installer had been caught out with but how many more guestimated certs of his are out there!!! NIC were not interested about that.

Regards
Antric


The NICEIC and their owners the Electrical Safety Council are never interested in safety issues, when another of their members are found doing non compliant and dangerous work.

The list of cases where the NICEIC/ESC turn there backs and walk away grows day by day, so much for the propaganda about being a safety organisation.

Even in this case with the sad death of Emma Shaw (22), the NICEIC/ESC walked away, I don't know how they can pretend any more to have any interest in the safety of the public.

With the slow collapse of the Part P Schemes structure, you can see why it is happening, when it is based on the standards and policies of the NICEIC.

With the Trade having given the Schemes aver £160 million over the last nine years we are no better off, it should be scrapped.

.
 01 April 2014 10:57 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

This case has another interesting point which is worth considerng.
The use of metal studwork obviously contributed to the outcome, so should we consider if this is actually an exposed conductive part, and therefore should have been bonded to earth. It is very difficult to tell if cables are trapped when boarding this studwork as it simply distorts allowing the boards to fit flat, and the long and pointed screws are very capable of penetrating almost anything.

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
 01 April 2014 11:17 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



OMS

Posts: 22864
Joined: 23 March 2004

Personally I wouldn't want to see an approach that tries to effectively earth every metallic component within the wall structure - madness.

I'm old enough (just) to have worked on a number of system build schools that had colour coated metallic partioning systems. This was the 15th edition and everyone wanted to earth and bond everything - it was total madness. I can remember sitting there actually showing bonding points to the panels on drawings because the senior engineer had decreed it -

Hindsight I appreciate, but we now have Reg 522.6.103 and we also have RCD protection to meet the requirements of additional protection - a million little curly green and yellow pigtails isn't going to be helpful in my opinion. To be a bit regimentally insane about it, how would you inspect them post construction as a simple reson for why no to do it

If the installer actually knows what he is doing (and gives a *****) then it's difficult to see how cables are routinely being trapped between boards and studs - basically there shouldn't be enough "slack" for that to happen - and equally, penetrating the C stud and hitting the cable shouldn't happen - as the cables shouldn't be using the stud as containment.

Regards

OMS

-------------------------
Let the wind blow you, across a big floor.
 01 April 2014 12:41 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mapj1

Posts: 12039
Joined: 22 July 2004

It is of course desperately sad for all involved, but also mercifully rare that a fault like this actually leads to fatality, as a number of things have to be badly wrong together. I this case the screw, the water and the fact she was in the water when, we must presume, she reached for the earthed plumbing.
We will not know how many wires out there are spiked by screws and nails, but luckily don't lead to ill effect, though we may guess its a good few from the number of times a wire is found that was clearly damaged ages before discovery - well I've found a few, and I've even drilled a cable I put in myself, and felt suitably foolish afterwards.
I also doubt that all cases will be found by the current testing methods, though actually doing them can only be a help. Certainly the presence of just a live screw alone, not touching E is unlikely to be spotted if the wall is dry, maybe a large area of foil backed board could be detected by measuring L-E versus N-E capacitance imbalance, but I can't see that getting added onto the list of things to be tested any time soon.
An RCD would have helped, in this case at least, so we can expect these sort of headlines to gradually become less common if we continue to encourage RCD use.
How would we be reacting if all the testing and paper work had been completed correctly, and the accident had still occurred I wonder ? (assuming the insulation had been L+N to E >100meg = "test pass" on switch-on day?)

regards

Mike

-------------------------
regards Mike
 01 April 2014 12:46 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



antric2

Posts: 1267
Joined: 20 October 2006

Another thing; I think the safety council should run an awareness campaign to highlight the need to regularly test RCD function with the test button and also to highlight the safety advantage of having RCDs installed in their home.
Regards
Antric
PS; I am not an RCD salesman...honest
 01 April 2014 08:07 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



aligarjon

Posts: 4053
Joined: 09 September 2005

i suspect that if the screw had just nicked the live and into the frame the result would have been the same with the installation passing all tests and livened up. or could actually happen on an existing installation that is already powered up if screws are fitted and the cables aren't back properly, which lets face it is possible with the way they stuff insulation into the voids these days.

Gary

-------------------------
Specialised Subject. The Bleedin Obvious. John Cleese
Statistics

New here?

  • To participate in discussions, please log in and introduce yourself.

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2022 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

 
..