I have just returned from an assessment as a second opinion from a client where his insurance claim for damaged infrastructure was rejected.

The damage was caused by hot connection inside the db from the neutral on the main incoming 16mm² cable that got so hot it combusted setting fire to the ceiling in the corridor. Remember the RCD can not detect a hot connection until the earth and neutral conductors melt together only then will the Rcd react.(Rcd mainswitch in db) All safety switchgear was installed correctly.

The insurance assessor was sent out and the claim was rejected not for the actual cause of incident but because a non compliant generator was wired to the db board and to make matterd worse for the home owner a COC was issued for the generator installation.

All tubular frame generators sold in South Africa are 90% V0-V configuration and not allowed by Sans10142 or the SA grid code as compliant.

SANS 10142-1 (and the additional Part 1-2 material for SSEGs / standby supplies) expects permanently wired, correctly bonded, and suitably switched alternative supplies. Portable V-0-V sets (plug-in, floating neutral) are generally not acceptable for such installations and could make your installation non-compliant and uninsurable. Also, utilities (Eskom / distributors) have NRS-type compatibility requirements that reinforce this.

Should you be in doubt get a trusted ME to asses and physically conduct tests to ensure your generator are compliant.

Above picture downloaded from the Forum SA.

50 minutes ago, TaliaB said:

a non compliant generator was wired to the db board and to make matterd worse for the home owner a COC was issued for the generator installation.

Is the COC a problem, or deemed fraudulent, because the generator is non-compliant?

1 hour ago, Bobster. said:

Is the COC a problem, or deemed fraudulent, because the generator is non-compliant?

The COC is a problem not issue in accordance with Sans10142 as it explicitly stipulates that V0V generators are not allowed to be connected to the db board. Surely fraudulent i am following up on the electricians credentials as this specific COC was not uploaded to the portal.(https://ecasa.co.za/ecoc-login/) neither was a test report supplied.

"SANS 10142-1 states in clause 7.12.2.7 that a 230 V generator with a V-O-V earth connection (centre tap on winding which is earthed) shall
not be connected to a fixed electrical installation. Such a generator may only be used as a free-standing unit to provide power to specific appliances"

So if I am understanding the scenario correctly.

1)V-0-V generator connected to power main building DB.

2).CoC was issued to sanction this installation.

3)Supply neutral ( before elcb/rcd main trip switch ) burned due to overload/some fault

4) Insurance claim denied based solely on points 1 and 2

Was the generator actually involved as a root cause?

How would a end user even know that the person that issued the CoC

a. Signed off on something illegal

b. Is not a real qualified electrician that issued a fraudulent CoC.

If the user was not given a legit certificate ( think it's the yellow government letterhead form ) , then point b. sounds plausible, but if the user was given the correct paperwork, you'd be none the wiser.

I assume it's possible that the actual CoC forms could be obtained illegally, but again, how would the end user know.

15 hours ago, MrBeauvedere said:

So if I am understanding the scenario correctly.

1)V-0-V generator connected to power main building DB.

2).CoC was issued to sanction this installation.

3)Supply neutral ( before elcb/rcd main trip switch ) burned due to overload/some fault

4) Insurance claim denied based solely on points 1 and 2

Was the generator actually involved as a root cause?

How would a end user even know that the person that issued the CoC

a. Signed off on something illegal

b. Is not a real qualified electrician that issued a fraudulent CoC.

If the user was not given a legit certificate ( think it's the yellow government letterhead form ) , then point b. sounds plausible, but if the user was given the correct paperwork, you'd be none the wiser.

I assume it's possible that the actual CoC forms could be obtained illegally, but again, how would the end user know.

I mean surely they cant expect the home owner to know? If he has a COC the insurance should pay the home owner and sort it out with the electrician. Is there a list of insurance approved electricians that people can use to do their COC?

Insurance is like warranties these days. You get promised 10 year warranties and pay for it just to get it rejected for "dust" etc. Something I have seen here for inverters failing.

2 hours ago, Denns said:

I mean surely they cant expect the home owner to know? If he has a COC the insurance should pay the home owner and sort it out with the electrician. Is there a list of insurance approved electricians that people can use to do their COC?

The property owner is responsible for ensuring compliance with SANS 10142-1 for their electrical installation, including obtaining a valid Electrical Certificate of Compliance (CoC) when required for property sales, alterations, or other specific circumstances. While a homeowner typically commissions a registered electrician for the inspection and CoC, they remain ultimately responsible for the safety and compliance of the installation and this is according to Sans10142

25 minutes ago, TaliaB said:

The property owner is responsible for ensuring compliance with SANS 10142-1 for their electrical installation, including obtaining a valid Electrical Certificate of Compliance (CoC) when required for property sales, alterations, or other specific circumstances. While a homeowner typically commissions a registered electrician for the inspection and CoC, they remain ultimately responsible for the safety and compliance of the installation and this is according to Sans10142

... and therein lies the crux of the matter. You can contract the best PM, Master builder, or electrician, trusting and checking their abilities and experience .... at your own peril.

1 hour ago, CobusK said:

... and therein lies the crux of the matter. You can contract the best PM, Master builder, or electrician, trusting and checking their abilities and experience .... at your own peril.

Electricians are supposed to have certification, and we can ask for that. Though how I would know a valid certificate is something I'm not sure about.

There are various possibilities. At one end there are electricians who do good, concientious work. At another there are owners who just want a COC as quickly as possible without having to correct any faults or even be told about them, and there are electricians who will provide that service. I had multiple problems with the house where I now live. The electrician who had most recently worked in the house came to see me (long story) and was quite candid about him not actually being registered to work here (he is legit in Mozambique and Portugal) and how there's a guy that "everybody knows" who will sign off on a COC for two grand, no questions asked. (Or there was that guy. I complained to the contractors board, who told me they already had him on their radar. But I would bet that he's not the only such.)

But your greater point is a valid one. We get in plumbers, electricians, all sorts of tradesmen, and we have to trust that they are doing the job properly. I have no way to check the work that any of these guys do.

Edited September 11, 2025Sep 11 by Bobster.

10 minutes ago, Bobster. said:

But your greater point is a valid one. We get in plumbers, electricians, all sorts of tradesmen, and we have to trust that they are doing the job properly. I have no way to check the work that any of these guys do.

The average joe is not technical and has no idea what SANS is. The typical home owner just knows to call and electrician or company to do the work for them. They will not know what breaker should be used, cable size etc.

That section in SANS 10142 is poorly written in my opinion. If the homeowner took the responsibilty to call and electrician and got his COC. The home owners job is done as far as I am concerned. Expecting the home owner to know whether the job was done right is nonsense in my opinion.

To me, the insurance companies that fail you on such a loophole are just thieves in my opinion.

Edited September 11, 2025Sep 11 by Denns

I think I like the idea that the Insurance companies should insist on a Certified Electrician be used in the process of a CoC being issued and secondly that in the event that there's issues, then the Insurance Company should go after the electrician or have a list of approved electricians. When things go "pear-shape", Insurance must pay up and seek compensation or redress from the Electrician. There's no way, an ordinary end-user or homeowner would be competent or qualified enough to know differences in cable sizes, breakers, fuses SANS guidelines etc.

2 hours ago, Denns said:

If the homeowner took the responsibilty to call and electrician and got his COC. The home owners job is done as far as I am concerned.

2 hours ago, Moffat said:

There's no way, an ordinary end-user or homeowner would be competent or qualified enough to know differences in cable sizes, breakers, fuses SANS guidelines etc.

Let me ask you this: Would you purchase a vehicle worth R500,000 without first doing some research into its quality and safety features? In the same way, before investing in a solar system, shouldn’t you take the time to understand at least the basic aspects of solar panels, inverters, and battery systems?

As the registered owner of a property, you are legally responsible for ensuring the safety of its occupants. Yet, how many property owners actually verify the credentials of the electrician(electrical contractor) before a Certificate of Compliance (CoC) is issued.When decided on an electrical contractor ensure the company registration has been done with DOL(Department of labour)

Did you know that a valid CoC should be accompanied by a test report, and in the case of solar installations, by two test reports? The SANS standards do not expect property owners to know the technical details of an electrical installation or the exact procedures required for a CoC. However, the law does require that property owners exercise due diligence."

Below accompanying test report(s) that must be supplied or attached to a COC to be valid.

40 minutes ago, TaliaB said:

Let me ask you this: Would you purchase a vehicle worth R500,000 without first doing some research into its quality and safety features? In the same way, before investing in a solar system, shouldn’t you take the time to understand at least the basic aspects of solar panels, inverters, and battery systems?

As the registered owner of a property, you are legally responsible for ensuring the safety of its occupants. Yet, how many property owners actually verify the credentials of the electrician(electrical contractor) before a Certificate of Compliance (CoC) is issued.When decided on an electrical contractor ensure the company registration has been done with DOL(Department of labour)

Did you know that a valid CoC should be accompanied by a test report, and in the case of solar installations, by two test reports? The SANS standards do not expect property owners to know the technical details of an electrical installation or the exact procedures required for a CoC. However, the law does require that property owners exercise due diligence."

Below accompanying test report(s) that must be supplied or attached to a COC to be valid.

I agree with your statement here, but I also agree with @Denns sentiment - In my opinion any insurance company that hides behind technicalities to invalidate claims should be named and shamed.

On 2025/09/05 at 3:55 PM, TaliaB said:

All safety switchgear was installed correctly.

The insurance assessor was sent out and the claim was rejected

1 hour ago, HennieL said:

In my opinion any insurance company that hides behind technicalities

There is a process to follow in this regard.

The claim was rejected for a generator connected to the distribution board that was not the cause of the incident. In defense of the home owner I will issue my report to the insurer's internal complaints department citing the facts that thermal expansion and contraction in the copper wire caused conductor creep that in turn caused a hot connection on the main neutral conductor. Should the internal claims department still reject the claim my report will be handed to the National Financial Ombud Scheme (NFOSA) for arbitration.

I will keep you posted on the outcome.

2 hours ago, TaliaB said:

Let me ask you this: Would you purchase a vehicle worth R500,000 without first doing some research into its quality and safety features? In the same way, before investing in a solar system, shouldn’t you take the time to understand at least the basic aspects of solar panels, inverters, and battery systems?

As the registered owner of a property, you are legally responsible for ensuring the safety of its occupants. Yet, how many property owners actually verify the credentials of the electrician(electrical contractor) before a Certificate of Compliance (CoC) is issued.When decided on an electrical contractor ensure the company registration has been done with DOL(Department of labour)

Did you know that a valid CoC should be accompanied by a test report, and in the case of solar installations, by two test reports? The SANS standards do not expect property owners to know the technical details of an electrical installation or the exact procedures required for a CoC. However, the law does require that property owners exercise due diligence."

Below accompanying test report(s) that must be supplied or attached to a COC to be valid.

I agree with you, but there are loopholes in everything, unfortunately. I bought my house early last year, and I had the certificates given to me for the COC. This year, my house had been tripping a lot on EL until the EL finally didn't want to be reset, as the fault was permanent.

I investigated and found out that the cable used to supply the pool area was just dug into the ground with no conduit or protection, and the insulation failed over time. It was blatantly obvious as I saw the cable sticking out on the side of the house. I set out to replace the cable, and guess what cable was used? A Flat twin and earth 2.5 cable with a 1.5 earth core.

The work looked like it was done in the last 3 years. I fail to find the validity of the test certificates if a COC is given for a cheap cable with no armouring or conduit, just dug into the ground, and using a cable with an earth conductor smaller than the live and neutral cores. This was just one of the things I had to redo around the house with the electrical wiring. One of the other things is joints in the house DB where the electrician just twisted the live cable supplying the oven and taped it. The live connections on the MCBs were mostly loose as I just had to pull the cable for the cables to pop out.

The only reason I know half the stuff done was wrong is because I am an Engineer and have designed and commissioned projects on quite a few mines and sites to date. I am not entirely clued up on residential wiring but what was done in my house was appalling, and if anything like a fire occurred because of the pool pump it definitely looks like insurance would not pay.

Now, how will someone without an Engineering or electrical background know these things? I definitely understand your point, but the insurance rejecting the claims to me is just plain wrong.

18 hours ago, CobusK said:

... and therein lies the crux of the matter. You can contract the best PM, Master builder, or electrician, trusting and checking their abilities and experience .... at your own peril.

Agreed.

I have seen plenty work done by Insurance Companies preferred artisan/contractor that is definitely not up to scratch.

Also, in most cases, the Estate agent is referring his own electrician to the owner to do the Coc.

Then surely, he must be a reputable artisan. Owner so happy he doesn't need to look for good artisan.

No offense to good reputable, correctly qualified artisans out there, but Coc issued by artisans must be stopped.

Bring back the Inspector of Machinery Department.

11 hours ago, Denns said:

Now, how will someone without an Engineering or electrical background know these things? I definitely understand your point, but the insurance rejecting the claims to me is just plain wrong.

They are trying to wring the last cent out of you, and in the case of a possible claim they will use every tactic to try and deny responsibility! From what i understand if/when this happens they are supposed to pay back all your premiums on that specific policy?

14 hours ago, TaliaB said:

Let me ask you this: Would you purchase a vehicle worth R500,000 without first doing some research into its quality and safety features? In the same way, before investing in a solar system, shouldn’t you take the time to understand at least the basic aspects of solar panels, inverters, and battery systems?

As the registered owner of a property, you are legally responsible for ensuring the safety of its occupants. Yet, how many property owners actually verify the credentials of the electrician(electrical contractor) before a Certificate of Compliance (CoC) is issued.When decided on an electrical contractor ensure the company registration has been done with DOL(Department of labour)

Did you know that a valid CoC should be accompanied by a test report, and in the case of solar installations, by two test reports? The SANS standards do not expect property owners to know the technical details of an electrical installation or the exact procedures required for a CoC. However, the law does require that property owners exercise due diligence."

Below accompanying test report(s) that must be supplied or attached to a COC to be valid.

Totally agree on with @TaliaB in respect of owner doing due diligence and having a huge part to play in the process, no arguments from me there, AT ALL. It goes only right that the homeowner or equipment owner is well versed with a set minimum standards of their equipment as well as even safety as some homeowners, can also be problematic and unreasonable during installations in relation to equipment location or even spacing around an inverter for instance e.g. having an inverter put in a cupboard that leads to a huge increase in ambient temperatures, fire hazards and premature equipment failure. It's the sneaky Insurers who I have a gripe with.

In pursuit of knowledge and due diligence, I count myself fortunate to be on this forum (amongst others), to be part of a community of experts that have taught me and continue to teach me so much on my journey in the renewable energy space.

Edited September 12, 2025Sep 12 by Moffat

On 2025/09/11 at 9:55 PM, TaliaB said:

I will keep you posted on the outcome.

I got some good news this morning regarding the claim rejection. The insurance company internal claims department inform both the client and myself that the claim would be honored. They will appoint an construction company that could start the work ASAP all that is left now the access amount must be paid to the construction company when they start with the repairs. As 1 condition the generator transfer switch with all wiring needs to be removed from the main db within a week unless the owner can commission a V-0-0 generator that he is not prepared to do on such short notice.

I contacted the IE that did the original installation and who also supplied the COC and asked him to remove the transfer switch all the wiring and supply a new supplementary COC stating that generator was removed and needs to be done at his cost. So all good there.

Hopefully the building contractor can start as soon as Tuesday as there is quite extensive damage to the corridor ceiling the kitchen ceiling and some trusses in the roof cavity also needs replacement. The inside of the house would need to be painted. So all and all a good outcome and a win for the client.

On 2025/09/11 at 10:08 PM, Denns said:

I agree with you, but there are loopholes in everything, unfortunately. I bought my house early last year, and I had the certificates given to me for the COC. This year, my house had been tripping a lot on EL until the EL finally didn't want to be reset, as the fault was permanent.

I investigated and found out that the cable used to supply the pool area was just dug into the ground with no conduit or protection, and the insulation failed over time. It was blatantly obvious as I saw the cable sticking out on the side of the house. I set out to replace the cable, and guess what cable was used? A Flat twin and earth 2.5 cable with a 1.5 earth core.

The work looked like it was done in the last 3 years. I fail to find the validity of the test certificates if a COC is given for a cheap cable with no armouring or conduit, just dug into the ground, and using a cable with an earth conductor smaller than the live and neutral cores. This was just one of the things I had to redo around the house with the electrical wiring. One of the other things is joints in the house DB where the electrician just twisted the live cable supplying the oven and taped it. The live connections on the MCBs were mostly loose as I just had to pull the cable for the cables to pop out.

The only reason I know half the stuff done was wrong is because I am an Engineer and have designed and commissioned projects on quite a few mines and sites to date. I am not entirely clued up on residential wiring but what was done in my house was appalling, and if anything like a fire occurred because of the pool pump it definitely looks like insurance would not pay.

Now, how will someone without an Engineering or electrical background know these things? I definitely understand your point, but the insurance rejecting the claims to me is just plain wrong.

The smaller area for the earth wire is totally acceptable as per SANS. This is how all Norse cables are manufactured. I am sure @TaliaB can correct me if I have it wrong .

He just knows every possible angle from SANS.😄

Edited September 13, 2025Sep 13 by Scorp007

1 hour ago, Scorp007 said:

The smaller area for the earth wire is totally acceptable as per SANS. This is how all Norse cables are manufactured. I am sure @TaliaB can correct me if I have it wrong .

He just knows every possible angle from SANS.😄

For 1.5mm² and 2.5mm² the protective earth conductor is the same cross section as the live and neutral conductors. From 4mm² upwards the protective earth conductor is 2.5mm² but it changes as the conductor cross section becomes larger. Use the table attached for clarification. Surfix , Norse and SWA will have the correct protective earth conductor size. When using GP wire then note must be taken from the table to ensure the correct protective earth conductor is used. The reason for using smaller earth wire is that the earth wire does not conduct unless there is a ground fault. So unlike L/N wires they do not get hot over continuous use. They just have to withstand high current for very brief period of time before MCBs trip. It should be fine as long as the insulation does not melt.

Edited September 14, 2025Sep 14 by TaliaB

Arc fault circuit breakers are now standard requirement in domestic installations in parts of the USA and also the UK. We usually follow about 5-8 years later so expect them to be required here eventually. Hopefully they come down in price before then.... at present an AFDD / RCBO, single pole, type A is about 110 UK pounds each.

On 2025/09/12 at 10:11 AM, Moffat said:

Totally agree on with @TaliaB in respect of owner doing due diligence and having a huge part to play in the process, no arguments from me there, AT ALL. It goes only right that the homeowner or equipment owner is well versed with a set minimum standards of their equipment as well as even safety as some homeowners, can also be problematic and unreasonable during installations in relation to equipment location or even spacing around an inverter for instance e.g. having an inverter put in a cupboard that leads to a huge increase in ambient temperatures, fire hazards and premature equipment failure. It's the sneaky Insurers who I have a gripe with.

This is problematic for me. I understand that in law I am responsible for seeing that the house has (for EG) safe wiring. But surely the law says that I should take reasonable precautions. I'm not an electrician. I take the matter seriously, but I have to rely on the electrician that I hire and I don't have the knowledge to check the job they do. As a homeowner in my neck of the wood I may face similar issues with electric fences, boreholes, a PV system, gas piped into the house from cylinders. Nobody is an expert in all of these. My goto electrician doesn't want to touch solar, nor electric fences. That's not a complaint, he's a good. diligent electrician who doesn't get invovled with stuff he doesn't full understand and isn't trained to work with.

I am prepared to take all these things seriously. I have never looked for a guy who would give a quick COC for a flat fee, no questions asked. I know that there are real safety concerns around this. I was pleased when I found a guy to certify my PV system and who actually came out, inspected, took measurements etc. He's doing a thorough job. BUT at the end of the day, as a layperson, all I can do is be concerned and hire people who have the necessary paperwork and trust that they do a proper job.

I would hope that a court would find that I had not been negligent, had taken reasonable precautions. But at the same time it's human nature to want to hold somebody responsible, and the letter of the law may well stipulate that the buck stops with the property owner. This is OK for companies who run shopping malls - they will have access to electricians with the right expertise, may even employ them. For a private home owner it's more difficult.

9 hours ago, Marv said:

Arc fault circuit breakers are now standard requirement in domestic installations in parts of the USA and also the UK. We usually follow about 5-8 years later so expect them to be required here eventually. Hopefully they come down in price before then.... at present an AFDD / RCBO, single pole, type A is about 110 UK pounds each.

That means the DB needs to be sealed with no light coming in. Seems like an expensive exercise and overkill. Also in typical protection schemes, you dont just trip on light. You trip on light and current. Otherwise you get a lot of nonsense trips. This definitely seems like overkill for a home with a 60/80A breaker.

Edited September 19, 2025Sep 19 by Denns

Light in the DB? Oh, not really :)
AFDD does not work on the principle of detecting light from the arc/sparking. It listens for high frequency currents and distorted waveforms on the connected circuit loop as HF and distortion is the common product of arcing. Should there be arcing anywhere in the whole length of a circuit, then AFDD will detect it and trip.

On the other hand, yes, AFDD will increase installation costs a bit. Not only because the price of AFDD itself (normally, you will need roughly 4 or more AFDDs per house) but because AFDD might start tripping based on false-alarms in some not-so-well-done home installations. Very same like RCD/RCBOs are. So, some houses might need at least partial rewiring in order to put AFDDs in.

10 minutes ago, Youda said:

Light in the DB? Oh, not really :)
AFDD does not work on the principle of detecting light from the arc/sparking. It listens for high frequency currents and distorted waveforms on the connected circuit loop as HF and distortion is the common product of arcing. Should there be arcing anywhere in the whole length of a circuit, then AFDD will detect it and trip.

On the other hand, yes, AFDD will increase installation costs a bit. Not only because the price of AFDD itself (normally, you will need roughly 4 or more AFDDs per house) but because AFDD might start tripping based on false-alarms in some not-so-well-done home installations. Very same like RCD/RCBOs are. So, some houses might need at least partial rewiring in order to put AFDDs in.

I am familiar with the ones used in substations and circuit breakers. They work on light. I am not sure if AFDD is the same as AFD (Arc flash detection). If an electrician opens a busbar chamber for example, it can cause the Arc sensor to pick up light and trip the substation. Sometimes it can be light from any source really. An Arc without current does not mean you should trip. So what they do is in the protection relay, you set the relay to trip only when light AND current are detected (because an arc would mean a lot of current) and only then do you trip.

Maybe the home ones work differently. I work with the industrial ones used in substations like the IS20. These days though, you can set the dB for the sensor to pick up so the relay doesnt just sense any light but a specific wavelength that would indicate an arc condition.

Btw I just checked, AFDD is Arc flas detection device. I didnt know that. I just know them as Arc Fault monitors. So we are talking about the same thing.

Edited September 19, 2025Sep 19 by Denns