what tends to happen is they install an SWA cable on a 32A MCB which is terminated on the driveway in a wiska box… technically it’s fully compliant as it would only be non compliant when the charger itself is installed…

Am I missing something here? Provided the EVSE has 30mA RCD protection included - which most seem to claim they do (presuming it does actually comply with the required standards, which has been questioned for one or two models) wouldn't 722.531.3.101 be satisfied even if the circuit was fed by an MCB?

   - Andy.

May I suggest it gets added to OSG for the next revision?

This is just a matter of keeping oneself well informed of what is required in terms of personal CPD… up to a point competency schemes should be on top of it as well. 
There’s no excuse for a jobbing sparks to not know what a B type RCBO with A type RCD characteristics is, and the difference between double pole, single pole (solid neutral) and switched neutral are and how to identify the symbols on the devices… after that it’s about being aware of which ones you as an installer need for the kind of installs you do.

I do understand that people should keep up with CPD..  It is not always the jobbing Spark doing it.  Some times the Designer is getting it wrong and the installer just go ahead with what is on the plan or diagram.  Sometimes the installer is not fully qualified or competent and they may be 1 of 10 with only one QS on site. 

This also brings up an interesting discussion.  Lets say the Designer or installed read the MI (manufacturers Instruction) for MyEnergy Zappi 2 to 3 years ago or they went on the installer course.  Now we know the Zappi does not comply to BS7671 with regards to the RCD protection so MyEnergy are now telling customers the Installer done it wrong.  However the Installer followed the MI issued at that time for the install done at that time. 

Sergio Fernandez said:

May I suggest it gets added to OSG for the next revision?

I will forward to the relevant department at the IET.

Myenergi falsely advertised their Zappi chargers fault protection as, “fully compliant with BS7671” Even one of the company directors Chris Horne, repeatedly mentioned on the MyEnergi forum in 2022 that no upfront RCD is required as all protection is built in. Unfortunately their inbuilt RCD does not comply with any of the BSEN numbers mentioned in part 7 of BS7671, this seems to be a sore point for Myenergi as the device does appear to work but for one reason or another has never been approved under any of the BSEN standards required by BS7671, I’ve heard that it might be because the device can’t be manually operated by the user/ordinary persons as it doesn’t have a test button nor a mechanical switch. In that situation an installer could have been fully aware that a 30mA RCD with A type characteristics that disconnects all live conductors was required but may have been mislead by the manufacturers instructions/advertising. I believe they removed all of the misleading online content in late 2022/2023 and the instructions now say with regards to RCD protection “local regulations should be checked”, not particularly clear but less misleading.
I have been in an ongoing dispute with MyEnergi over this for some time as I believe that chargers I purchased were missold to me. Others claim they were miss instructed during the manufactures training course. Others claim that Myenergi has refused to replace chargers under warranty where no upfront RCD was fitted despite their obvious inference that one was not required. All in all they are going to have to pull their thumbs out as what they’ve said and done is not right. 

Myenergi needs to sit down with some installers and get there opinion/consultation and come up with a plan and a stratergy and then present it to the wider community for there thoughts.  If they don't they will lose business as people will not want to install their kit.  Once bitten twice shy and all that. 

They do need to correct the issue.  Years ago Wylex had a MCB issue and they paid installers to swap them out.  I do understand it is easy for me to say this but at the end of the day someone has to pay for the work and the parts.  Some times things go wrong and sometimes things are done wrong.  What make the difference is how it is dealt with and rectified. 

This brings up another question and maybe a debate it needed by the community as a whole.

BS7671 says refer to MI and MI can overide BS7671 as it allows for new technologies.  However what if the MI is wrong?  Do we then need to go back to the document of conformity?  Was the conformity done before there was a BS/BSEN standard written?

How long will it be before a Hager AFDD is the source of a fire or not done it intented job of Ark Fault Detection.?  AFAIK Taylot Wimpey are still using and specifying Hager CU in their new build domestic dwellings.  Some electricians have already stated that they will no longer fit Hager as it leaves them exposed. 

Hi Sergio. Can you explain why you think electricians are left ‘exposed’ when installing Hager’s AFDDs?

Have a look at the video by David @ DSES on YouTube.  He put the Hager bluetooth AFDD against several other brands of AFDD and they all trip.  The Hager does not.  If you look at the Hager response to the videos again on YouTube they show a test in which the cable catches fire well flames are visable before it trips.  Now if that cable is in a new build with wood frame work there is a passibility that the fire has started before the Hager AFDD trips or if the Hager AFDD is retro fitted to a typical 19020 UK house.  There are 2 versions of the Hager AFDD one with Bluetooth and one without.  The one with no bluetooth on David's test trips in his test but the one with Bluetooth does not. 

I’ll take a look, thanks. Has there been any official response from Hager addressing the concerns about their AFDDs?

I’ll take a look, thanks. Has there been any official response from Hager addressing the concerns about their AFDDs?

AFAIK the only response from Hager is the following video

https://youtu.be/-aVdvoNVDRg?si=xYAUnVXoXGDZRT5T