Speak EV - Electric Car Forums banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am probably about to launch legal proceedings against the installer of my MyEnergi unit, MyEnergi (who recommended the "Approved Installer") and EV Comply who seem to be a middle man in all of this.

I would like to know if anyone else has had the issue of the Zappi 2 indicating a "PE Fault" - MyEnergi told me to bypass this by tricking the unit into thinking I had an earth rod (IT) when I didn't.

The "Recommended Installer" used the SWA insulation instead of the copper conductor in the cable when installing the unit, which I believe is causing the PE fault, as well as resting the earth cable on the busbar which could melt, short and could cause a fire!

The issue wasn't much of a problem because of MyEnergi's bodge job of tricking the unit, but after my wife got a Renault ZE 50, the PE fault came back to haunt me, MyEnergi couldn't help and when I told them about the SWA being used and not the copper conductor, they told me it wasn't "Installed to specification"

Does anyone else have this sort of experience or am I the unlucky one?

I'm really disappointed by MyEnergi / EV Comply for not even responding to my complaint. The installer emailed me over 2 weeks ago, promising an inspection, but no proposals or further contact has been made since!

------

Original Complaint Email

I am writing to you to formally complain about the installation that was billed under your invoice number (INV-2594)

I had a few minor issues which were not too much of an issue, but with the more severe installation errors coming to light, I've lost my patience and am raising a formal complaint and letter of claim for all the issues below that I've had with your company and service.

1) I completed an online quote for a MyEnergi Zappi 2 unit to be installed at my property, I had specified a 7kW tethered unit on the MyEnergi quote page and received a quote which I was happy enough with from yourselves.

2) The DNO had to remove a looped supply and I had to wait until that was done.

3) Whilst the DNO had installed the new supply, I ran a new EV Supply cable from the meter cupboard and installed a steel plinth to house the proposed Zappi charger.

4) I asked if there were any possibility of some discount to account for the pre-run cable and plinth, I was issued a replacement quote (which I didn't realise had changed the tethered unit to an untethered unit) at £50 less, which I accepted, assuming the £50 accounted for the removal of cable, not the downgrade of units.

5) Despite accepting the quote (AND chasing the install date multiple times) and being told your company would arrange an install date "probably look at week commencing 12th April for your installation. (Jill)" I called, agreed and was waiting for confirmation, which was never made.

6) I received an email on the 14th April following a further chase, asking if I was ok for an installation "tomorrow morning", at which point I had already given up and asked for quotes from other installers as I had assumed this wasn't going to happen.

7) I raised an issue with the installer about the unit being untethered which he shrugged off as "being better than tethered as you can add your set length of cable". I had lost all patience and just let him get on with it.

8) The installer said during the installation (which was live, nothing was isolated): "I had a few shocks from the fuse board, but it's nowhere near as bad as three phase, they really hurt!" - This raised an alarm in my head, but I shrugged it off, after all, he was the "Professional". I was told the certificate would be with me "over the weekend".

9) I get an invoice on the 16th April, this is paid by the 19th April.

10) On the 12th May, I got an email asking for details to allow you to claim the OZEV grant. This is replied to without delay. I chase up the installation certificate which is ignored.

11) I chase up the installation certificate during April and May, as well as emails on May 19th and May 21st. I finally received the certificate on the 21st May after much stress and anxiety from the landlord, insisting on the document. The "installer was sick" excuse doesn't wash with me and for £300 per hour labour charge, it should've been completed on site!

12) I have a few issues with the Zappi unit reporting a "PE Fault", I call MyEnergi and they tell me to override the safety check of the earthing system by changing the earthing type on the unit from TT/TN to IT, which did resolve the issues temporarily.

13) My wife gets a Renault Zoe ZE50, which wouldn't charge from the unit at all, I seek further advice from MyEnergi

14) I completed the latest firmware update (to supposedly solve the PE fault) and I still get it with the ZE50.

15) I asked a local electrician to inspect the earthing on the unit, and it's clear the installer botched the install, by not using the earth conductor. I've not had the full installation inspected, but it seems that either the SWA has been used as an earth, the earthing is not installed correctly or the earthing is not sufficient.

16) I confirm with MyEnergi (15/06/2021) that the SWA is not supposed to be used as a suitable earth for the charge unit, and the installation has not been carried out in line with MyEnergi's installation procedures.

17) I attach pictures of both sides of the install, which shows the earth from the gland on the install, resting against the busbar inside the consumer unit which could melt if subjected to a high load.

18) The charger still won't work on the Zoe ZE50, despite MyEnergi technical assistance, they can't support me further as it is a non compliant install, which is appalling as you are one of their "Tried and trusted installers"!

19) In conclusion, I believe the install wasn't to spec, I was originally quoted for a tethered unit and was sneakily downgraded to an untethered unit, the install isn't to spec and not fit for purpose, despite you signing it off and issuing a safety certificate for the install.

As a resolution I propose the following, either of which would be acceptable to myself in full and final settlement of this complaint.

1) The installation is removed, made safe and a full refund is issued, including the OZEV grant, allowing me to source a new installation.

2) The installation is made safe by properly installing the correct copper earthing (as supplied in the pre-laid cable), in line with all regulations, and a tethered unit (as originally quoted) is installed in replacement.

or

3) The installation is made safe by properly installing the correct copper earthing (as supplied in the pre-laid cable), and a refund gesture of goodwill of 50% of the invoice is made.

I am offering either of those 3 above resolutions as full and final settlement of this complaint, if neither are agreeable to yourselves, then I have no choice but to begin legal proceedings for the costs of making the installation safe, removing the installation and installing the originally quoted unit to the standard meeting all laws and guidance.

I would rather not discuss this over the phone any longer as this has now entered the territory where legal action may be necessary and would prefer a paper trail for our mutual protection.

I have attached a copy of the images taken during the inspection, but should a thorough inspection be required, the costs would also be added to any future claim.

Thank You
146748
146749

146756
146750
146751
146752
146754
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,641 Posts
Using the armour as the CPC is fine for that size cable, although they really should have connected the internal CPC as well. Not the tidiest workmanship, TBH, but very far from being the worse I've seen. I'd have used a piranha nut rather than the old school banjo and bolt, but that's just a personal preference.

Is the boot missing off the SWA gland?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
f
Using the armour as the CPC is fine for that size cable, although they really should have connected the internal CPC as well. Not the tidiest workmanship, TBH, but very far from being the worse I've seen.
I get that, but MyEnergi is saying it's a non compliant install and they won't provide any further technical help. Even I, as a completely unqualified noob know that Copper is a much better conductor than steel.

Is the boot missing off the SWA gland?
I'm really sorry, I'm not an electrician, could you please clarify what you mean?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,641 Posts
f


I get that, but MyEnergi is saying it's a non compliant install and they won't provide any further technical help. Even I, as a completely unqualified noob know that Copper is a much better conductor than steel.


I'm really sorry, I'm not an electrician, could you please clarify what you mean?

Nothing at all wrong with using the armour as CPC, for that size cable the regs are clear that it is more than adequate. That is not non-compliant, on it's own, although personally I'd have also connected the internal CPC as well, not that it would make the slightest difference if it all tested out OK in terms of earth loop impedance. There is such a large area in the armour that being made of steel is of no consequence for this size cable.


Using the brass banjo and bolt to connect the internal CPC to the gland and armour is normal practice, although there are brass nuts (piranha nuts) that have a screw on the side and avoid the need to use the banjo, and I think they make for a neater job. The SWA cable gland should have a rubber boot on it if this installation is outdoors, but if it's not then it doesn't really need it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
he SWA cable gland should have a rubber boot on it if this installation is outdoors, but if it's not then it doesn't really need it.
The meter cupboard and consumer unit is inside. My main issue is that MyEnergi won't offer further tech support as the unit (in their words) hasn't been installed to their specifications.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,641 Posts
Hard to see any reason for that from the photos. The only thing I'd change is to just tie the internal cable CPC to the banjo bolt, not that it would make any difference at all as long as the armour is correctly gripped in the glands at both ends, but it is good practice. I'd also have put a heat shrink sleeve over the data core, to tidy up the end of it, as it stands it's a bit ratty looking.

FWIW, you can wire a charge point up with two core SWA and just use the armour as the CPC. Your installer has used the expensive cable that includes the data pair for the CT, and that comes with an internal CPC that can be used in addition to the armour.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,641 Posts
Just to add, whatever you do don't use what you've written above in any form of legal case, because it really won't stand up at all, as most of it isn't actually correct. For example, the busbar is insulated, as is the CPC running close to it, so although it's not tidy, and the CPC really needs dressing a bit, it's not either dangerous or non-compliant. as it stands.

Same goes for using the armour as the CPC. It would be good practice to also connect the internal CPC core, but it's probably not non-compliant as using the armour is fine if properly terminated in the glands. There's nothing in those photos that stands out as being grossly non-compliant with the regs, I'm afraid. It's not the tidiest workmanship, but frankly it's a great deal better than some I've seen.

It looks as if the armour has been terminated pretty well from the photos, TBH, as the most common poor workmanship area with these is stripping back too much outer so that the armour shows under the gland, and that gland looks neat enough on the face of it.

Before going further it would make sense to get hold of the electrician that did the work and ask him/her for a copy of the EIC, as that will show whether or not the testing was done and what the recorded test results were. If you really want to push for some tidying up of the install, and want a check to ensure that the glands are properly terminated at both ends, then get an electrician in to inspect and test it. This will only take half an hour, and will tell you for sure if there really is a problem with the continuity of the CPC through the armour.

If there is, a problem with the CPC continuity, then you have a really good case to call whichever body the original electrician is registered with and get them to independently verify that the installation is non-compliant. My experience is that the Part P cartels are usually reasonably good at sorting out poor workmanship by their members.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Hello,

can I share this with my engineer. He did an electrical installation recently in our premise and explained earth faults and circuit breaker operation. would you mind if I share the photos with him.

An e-mail address would help me drop a mail with his suggestions to your inbox directly.

Thanks.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top