p.i.r inspection

[JohnM20]

Have any of you heard of the next unpublicised test on a caravan. Apparently we will have to have the sealant around the roof lights tested to see if it leaks. This is because there is a possibility that in the event of heavy rain we will all be drowned in our beds.

Probability of faulty wiring in a caravan causing damage, injury or death, millions to one. Probability of injury or death due to a road accident, relatively very, very much higher. Why don't they ban driving ???

It's about time this country got real.

JohnM

 

[Damian]

Quote "Have any of you heard of the next unpublicised test on a caravan. Apparently we will have to have the sealant around the roof lights tested to see if it leaks. This is because there is a possibility that in the event of heavy rain we will all be drowned in our beds."

And making totally off topic and ridiculous statements like that add nothing to the debate.

And, by the way,all seals are (or should be) checked during an annual service anyway.

 

[Surfer]

Damian it seems that you are annoyed by remarks made in jest about our nanny state. If you do not let out your caravan whether it is a static or touring caravan no PIR is required. It does state this in the link I posted and is again stated in an earlier post. Are you trying to say that Cornwall council have got it wrong and if so can you please direct us to the regulation that specifically states that touring caravans require a PIR if they are only used by the owner and immediate family? Thanks.

 

[dougie_374468830]

Please go back to my last post about the over-wintering mouse and think about it. That mouse`s family could be in YOUR caravan right now creating lovely bare wires for you and yours to touch. A pir inspection might find these faults before you have a hair-raising experience.

Has anyone else on here done the course (i`m guessing Damian has)? A caravan is a flexible building and must only use multi-strand conductors.Which i understand to be more prone to corrosion.An extreme case being the 12n/12s sockets which im sure many of you have battled with.Imagine that type of corrosion in the rear of your sockets of your 10 yr old van.You wont know till something happens,

The Pir will find those bad connections through the continuity/resistance check. Bad or damaged insulation through the 500v insulation test and correct operation of your RCD using a proper tester not just by pushing the button.

 

[Parksy]

Ian's link is here for those who wish to see the document.

Dougie wrote:

Seems i cant win here.Trucker thinks my price is reasonable and Parksy thinks i am out to rip him off.

It's nothing personal Dougie but the way that we and no doubt others are treated by the dealers who service our caravan we now have a healthy scepticism when wads of wonga are demanded without proof to my own satisfaction that I absolutely have to spend my money.

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, good luck to you but before I start shelling out even more money I want to be 100% sure that I have no other choice.

 

[Parksy]

For the PIR check to save us from problems with mice surely it would need to be carried out every time the caravan was about to be used?

A responsible caravan owner would check the caravan for him or herself before using it and would be aware of mice infestation.

An irresponsible caravan owner would probably never have the caravan serviced anyway.

 

[Dustydog]

The few who use this and similar forums are lucky that we now have a better idea of the PIR.

What body , organisation or quango is responsible for bringing this to the caravanners attention?

The NCC have notified "all workshops" I understand but is that it??

How can poor old Joe Bloggs know about PIR's if no one has told him?

I have this vision of dozens of caravaners arriving on site , unaware of PIRs, then being barred from using EHUs because they don't have a certificate. Another ruined holiday for a lot of innocent people.

I have no problem with this latest "rule / requirement" but for heavens sake can someone somewhere take responsibility and properly publisise it!!

Cheers

Dustydog

 

[RayS]

What a thread this is turning into ! The one thing i have yet to see is reference to any relible data on the accident rate caused by the sort of fault this check is supposed to pick up.

I suspect the rate is very low indeed - certainly in 40+ years of caravanning i have never heard one proven instance.

In the 1970s the chemical industry was very concerned about the safety of processing plant, but the problem was ' how safe is safe ?' It also turned out that to increase safety by and order of magnituded - from 1 in 100 to 1 in 1000 risk, say was likely to cost proportionally much more than the benefit above a certain level. An expert at ICI proposed that a generally acceptable level of risk could be that an employee was no more at risk while at work than his/her riswk of bing killed by lightning going to or from work.

This had the benefit of being understandable and of comparison with a risk level that keeps very few people awake at nights.

It seems to me that the PIR regulations are aimed at a problem which largely does not exist, or at least only exists at a very low occurance level.

Can anyone provide (or link to) any reliable data based on fact rather than on suppositiion - i.e has any responsible risk analaysis been carried out ? If not, why not before this route has been followed.

The phrase 'all out of proportion' comes to mind

 

[Parksy]

The tried and trusted 'invent a problem and come up with a solution ' springs to mind here.

The NCC seem to have discovered a way to increase the earnings of their approved technicians meanwhile the caravan owner is hit with the double whammy of having to fork out for the PIR certificate the frequency of which seems to have been left to the technician (so that will be every 12 months then as shown by Dougie) and again in increased fees for the use of ehu which have to be tested as well.

The site owner will simply pass the cost on to the caravanner.

If electrical installations in caravans pose such a high risk why were they not thoroughly checked anyway as part part of the service before now?

This is the thin end of the wedge.

It's only a matter of time before we will need to carry a sheaf of documents around with us before we are allowed to pitch up for the night and caravanning will be out financial reach for most of us due to rising fuel costs and petty bureaucracy.

Another British industry bites the dust!

When confronted with a caravan site owner demanding to see our 'papers' maybe we should conduct an inspection of the site to find out if they are in compliance with every other 'elf & safety, disability access, fire and flood regulation :0)

 

[LMH]

Sorry, I haven't read all the thread but with reference to the last few posts is it correct that:

If you own a touring caravan and you don't let it out, it DOESN'T NEED this test and supporting paperwork. Is that correct?

Also, is it correct that the CC will not allow touring vans on their sites WITHOUT evidence that the test has been carried out?

Speaking about a van which is over the age of three years.

Thanks.

Lisa

 

[ANTHONYB1]

The tried and trusted 'invent a problem and come up with a solution ' springs to mind here.

The NCC seem to have discovered a way to increase the earnings of their approved technicians meanwhile the caravan owner is hit with the double whammy of having to fork out for the PIR certificate the frequency of which seems to have been left to the technician (so that will be every 12 months then as shown by Dougie) and again in increased fees for the use of ehu which have to be tested as well.

The site owner will simply pass the cost on to the caravanner.

If electrical installations in caravans pose such a high risk why were they not thoroughly checked anyway as part part of the service before now?

This is the thin end of the wedge.

It's only a matter of time before we will need to carry a sheaf of documents around with us before we are allowed to pitch up for the night and caravanning will be out financial reach for most of us due to rising fuel costs and petty bureaucracy.

Another British industry bites the dust!

When confronted with a caravan site owner demanding to see our 'papers' maybe we should conduct an inspection of the site to find out if they are in compliance with every other 'elf & safety, disability access, fire and flood regulation :0)

Hi Parksy, I think that you just hit the nail on the head completely.To pay that amount of money for a non-existant fault is a scam of the worse kind.

If the NCC want something to occupy their time why don,t they check the quality control at the manufactures.

Anthony

 

[Sproket]

Maybe the NCC is trying to get the government to bring in a scrappage scheme for older vans 3 years + (

Maybe its to cut down on warranty repairs (

Then they will be offering bog offs ( you buy one & get one free ) )

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

hi all

earlier someone mentioned the thin end of the wedge?? sounds about right to me as for scare mongering well judge for yourself is my view.

what happend to mots for van and now pirs next it will be any electrical device used in the van so the tv. kettle. microwave. laptop ect will all have to have a certificate before being used. where does it all stop,??

the answer is probably when we all stop using our vans.

colin

 

[JohnM20]

I'm sorry that Damian did not see my post in the light hearted way that was intended, even though there was a very serious side to it.

With any insurance, and I believe a PIR test can be considered as a form of insurance, the calculations must be made on the grounds of probability, not possibility. The probability of me getting drowned by a faulty roof seal is millions X millions to one. The probability of getting injured or worse whilst driving is far greater as I said in my earlier post. But these probabilities are based on statistical data of actual occurences of the problem. As Moderator Ray S asks, where is the reliable data. No one has, so far produced any statistics on this forum except for Dougie and his mouse. How many of us can say hand on heart that they have first hand knowledge of a serious problem that would have been prevented by the PIR test. My guess is very few, if any.

A few other points come to mind though. (A) If the test takes four hours, the same as a service, where are the extra staff coming from and where is the extra space for the tests to be carried out. If a workshop is busy to capacity, as many already are, how can they cope with twice the number of hours of work ?

(B) If these 'problems' exist in a caravan, why are they not designed out before manufacture begins ? It could be argued that a caravan is not fit for purpose if it is known that life threatening problems were likely due to the design. I'd sooner pay a little more for a caravan when new and have a 'safe from the start' caravan than having to shell out year on year for a test that will, hopefully, but more importantly probably, show that no problem actually does exists.

(C) Most of us have a limited budget for living generally and we have to decide where to spend that money wisely. If we are 'forced' to pay for a PIR test that immediately puts up the cost of caravanning. So what do we do, stay less nights on a site or decide to miss the annual service this year on the grounds that the caravan has only done a few thousand miles. I know which option I would spend the money on given a totally free choice, the one that already checks brakes, tyres, bearings, couplings gas etc AND electrics.

JohnM

 

[Surfer]

Someone mentioned mice, wiring and PIR. How on earth is a PIR going to pick it up if a mouse has chewed through the wiring? Even the NCC admit that it is not possible to check everything unless you had to strip all the wiring from the caravan.

Anyway as long as you do not rent out the caravan you do not have to have a PIR. Secondly have read through my insurance T & Cs there is no mention of an annual or even a 3 yearly PIR which seems to confirm that it is only a recommendation and not mandatory.

As for the CC they have no intention of asking for a PIR on a caravan as they know they stand to lose a substantial amount of money as it would be impossible to monitor and for all their members to have a PIR done by the end of this year never mind next year.

 

[vernon]

This whole thread started with an unknown(!) "NCC Approved Service Engineer" telling Michael that he will have to have a PIR to get onto sites in future.

What a shambles, get a life everyone.

Now, what rumour can I start?

 

[Gafferbill]

... try this one Vernon.

The goat ate the Christmas decorations and then developed a taste for caravan wiring causing numerous faults in thousands of caravans.

Nobody has seen this goat or Valerie the goat's owner, they are very illusive......... In fact nobody is sure if it is the goat causing this electrical damage.

Just to make sure all caravans are to be tested for goat damage.

The new G.D. test (Goat Damage test) is to be carried out annually at a specially built testing station at Kirkwall in the Orkneys and it is compulsory ;-)

The test is free!

 

[readcaravans]

if people really want proof of failures i can document from the results of our training course were 4 sample caravans were used for training and testing.

4hrs would be a maximum time for a full PIR given that the caravan is fitted with all extras as standard.

we tested a 4yr old coachman twin axle, a 6yr old bailey, a 3yr old abbey and i think the last was a 6 yr old 2 berth coachman. unfortunately every one failed the PIR for faults which would never be tested for during a normal service.

these faults were:

1. sockets not fitted correctly and no proper enclosures

2. gaps in sockets large enough for childrens fingers

3. faulty breakers not tripping out within their limits

4. faulty or incorrect wiring

5. earthing and bonding faults

6. incorrect installation of wiring

7. incorrect position of sockets and wiring

8. incorrect earth returns

9. loose connections

10. incorrect connections

11. incorrect rated breakers

12. inappropriate breakers

13. faulty hook up cables

14. faulty hook up points

and the list goes on.

the point being that until we ran this course we didnt even know to look for these faults, that faults existed or the consequences of not identifying them. this is not aimed at being scaremongering, but merely given evidence to the sceptics who have asked for it.

i too agree that this is a step too far and a compromise could have been achieved by the NCC if they had wanted to.

 

[readcaravans]

i must also point out that we have been a member of the AWS since July 2000, infact we were the 1st in lancashire because i agreed with what the scheme was trying to achieve and what it represented to the customer. this was an industry recognized standard of workmanship, quality, training and customer satisfaction.

now whether i agree or not to PIR, i have to comply if i want to stay a member of AWS. i now have 3 technicians plus myself who are qualified to complete the PIR. i just hope it has not been a waste of time, money and resources, but i am still waiting for the first phone call from a customer enquiring about a PIR.

 

[Entwood]

if people really want proof of failures i can document from the results of our training course were 4 sample caravans were used for training and testing.

4hrs would be a maximum time for a full PIR given that the caravan is fitted with all extras as standard.

we tested a 4yr old coachman twin axle, a 6yr old bailey, a 3yr old abbey and i think the last was a 6 yr old 2 berth coachman. unfortunately every one failed the PIR for faults which would never be tested for during a normal service.

these faults were:

1. sockets not fitted correctly and no proper enclosures

2. gaps in sockets large enough for childrens fingers

3. faulty breakers not tripping out within their limits

4. faulty or incorrect wiring

5. earthing and bonding faults

6. incorrect installation of wiring

7. incorrect position of sockets and wiring

8. incorrect earth returns

9. loose connections

10. incorrect connections

11. incorrect rated breakers

12. inappropriate breakers

13. faulty hook up cables

14. faulty hook up points

and the list goes on.

the point being that until we ran this course we didnt even know to look for these faults, that faults existed or the consequences of not identifying them. this is not aimed at being scaremongering, but merely given evidence to the sceptics who have asked for it.

i too agree that this is a step too far and a compromise could have been achieved by the NCC if they had wanted to.

Of your 14 points ... all of which I accept as being true "faults" nd possibly dangerous ...

IMHO all except 3, 9, and 13 are INSTALLATION faults, and in the majority of cases are MANUFACTURING faults.

I accept that on some vans an incorrect DIY or "aftermarket" install could give rise to some of the other points ... but to make EVERY owner pay, every year, to check what was done at the time of build - eg 1, 2, 6, 7 and a few more

is rip-off country IMHO ..

 

[Entwood]

Sorry .. somehow my reply became a comment ..

Repeated now ..

Of your 14 points ... all of which I accept as being true "faults" nd possibly dangerous ...

IMHO all except 3, 9, and 13 are INSTALLATION faults, and in the majority of cases are MANUFACTURING faults.

I accept that on some vans an incorrect DIY or "aftermarket" install could give rise to some of the other points ... but to make EVERY owner pay, every year, to check what was done at the time of build - eg 1, 2, 6, 7 and a few more

is rip-off country IMHO ..

 

[Parksy]

With reference to B.S 7671:2008 the foreword to the regulations states:

'Introduction to BS 7671:2008

BS 7671:2008 Requirements for Electrical Installations was issued on 1st January 2008 and is intended to come

into effect on 1st July 2008. Installations designed after 30th June 2008 are to comply with BS 7671:2008.

Does this mean that installations designed and fitted before

30th June 2008 are unaffected by the 17th edition?

Edit: I've alter my question to 'before'

 

[Surfer]

It is duly noted that all the faults raised by Reed caravans seem to be inherent manufacturing defects and would be repairable under SOGA and would be the responsibility of the dealer. None of the faults seem to stem from normal towing etc.

It now seems definite that the caravan industry is trying to scare us into having PIRs done because they are not doing a proper PDI on a caravan prior to delivery.

Also if the caravan warped that badly that a child could insert their fingers behind a socket then I would say that the caravan is not fit for the purpose for which it was built.

In additon gaps like that do not appear overnight so it is obvious that if the caravan was being services regularly, the dealership was not doing a proper service and not checking the electrics although it si supposed to form part of the service.

This is from Reed caravans sevcie check sheet;

Section Three - Electrical

1. Check RCD circuit breaker and MCBs

2. Test 13amp sockets

3. Check operation of all interior lights

4. Check road lights, reflectors, and awning lamp.

5. Check operation of water pump.

6. Certificate of Mains by qualified Electrical Engineer.

Seems obvious that one of the caravans were sold or serviced by Reed as surely they would have picked up these defects as part of the PDI or even the service!

If the caravans were sold and then serviced by Reed then I am totally shocked and flabbergasted as obviously someoen has not been following their check sheet!

 

[Surfer]

It is duly noted that all the faults raised by Reed caravans seem to be inherent manufacturing defects and would be repairable under SOGA and would be the responsibility of the dealer. None of the faults seem to stem from normal towing etc.

It now seems definite that the caravan industry is trying to scare us into having PIRs done because they are not doing a proper PDI on a caravan prior to delivery.

Also if the caravan warped that badly that a child could insert their fingers behind a socket then I would say that the caravan is not fit for the purpose for which it was built.

In additon gaps like that do not appear overnight so it is obvious that if the caravan was being services regularly, the dealership was not doing a proper service and not checking the electrics although it si supposed to form part of the service.

This is from Reed caravans sevcie check sheet;

Section Three - Electrical

1. Check RCD circuit breaker and MCBs

2. Test 13amp sockets

3. Check operation of all interior lights

4. Check road lights, reflectors, and awning lamp.

5. Check operation of water pump.

6. Certificate of Mains by qualified Electrical Engineer.

Seems obvious that one of the caravans were sold or serviced by Reed as surely they would have picked up these defects as part of the PDI or even the service!

If the caravans were sold and then serviced by Reed then I am totally shocked and flabbergasted as obviously someoen has not been following their check sheet!

Apoligies as "Seems obvious that one of the caravans were sold" should be "Seems obvious that none of the caravans were sold"

 

[vernon]

Browsing PIR info in BS7671, which appears to relate to Building regs.

It appears that an issued PIR Certificate lists problems, BUT you don't have to have them corrected, so how would a site owner know if your caravan was "safe" or not, unless he reads and can understand the Certificate.

Training courses for site operators to understand PIR Certificates will be next - that's my next rumour!