During an inspection today I tripped the GFCI in the Bathroom upstairs. When It would not reset. I went down to the GFCI in the downstairs bathroom and it was also tripped. I reset it there. When I went back upstairs I could then reset that one. I tested this several times with the same outcome. Is this a problem?
yes. if you have more than one GFI in line with each other than the latter cancels the first and the first protects the ladder. so i would recommend removing the outlet down stream, and the whole circut still be protected by the upstream outlet and negate the need for the second one. or so thay say.
Redundancy is not necessarily a problem.
not a “safty” or “code” or “fire” problem. nuisance, yes, and i think that a nuisance is a problem. thou you are right Jeff, by that it doesn’t HAVE to be fixed, but i always recommend it.
As do I. . .
Had to put this in a report just last week…(older home…pre “bathroom code”)
**Improve: **The GFCI receptacle at the west side of the roof deck is fed by the GFCI receptacle at the east side of the roof deck which in turn is fed from the GFCI receptacle at the master bathroom vanities. There is nothing inherently wrong with this arrangement (although new code would require the deck to be on a separate circuit). However, it is “overkill” and a little confusing. In the current configuration the master bathroom GFCI is all that is needed and you could remove the GFCI’s at the deck and replace them with normal receptacles.
As others said…not a safety issue, but a probable nuisance.
Shows it was installed by a non professional. If they wanted an additional GFCI in the other bath, they should move the load wires on the first one to the line side.
Where’s the smiley to show that you are just kidding? That’s just wrong!
what I meant was, the original config most likely had one gfi to serve both baths. Someone decides they want a gfi in each bath for whatever reason. Fine, but now open the first gfi and move the load wires to the line side so you’re only protecting that location, your new one will protect the second bath and when one trips you won’t have to run back and forth to reset everything. If there are additional loads needing protection they can feed from the second receptacle, or they too can have point of use protection by adding another gfi.
Brian…if you reverse the line/load on the first GFCI, then that receptacle will only protect outlets downsteam. The fisrt GFCI receptacle itself will have NO PROTECTION! It will be hot even when tripped. Actually, if it’s a newer (semi-idiot-proof) GFCI, you also wouldn’t be able to reset it once tripped.
It’s possible that I’m misunderstanding your use of the word “first”. Probably better to use upstream and downstream. But in any case…
If you want to get rid of a GFCI that is protected from elsewhere, fine. Replace it with a normal receptacle. Suggesting that someone should deliberately reverse-wire a GFCI is wrong, wrong, wrong!
No I never said to reverse the line & load. I said to move the downstream load wires to the line side along with the incoming line, in other words, leave the load terminals empty. Then the downstream receptacle can be replaced with a GFCI and each will trip individually without affecting the other.
OK…got it. :oops: Sorry for the misunderstanding and the lecture.
no problemo senior…as an electrician I am always on the lookout for any clues as to who did the work. When I see evidence of non professional work it tips me off to check things closely and to be extra careful, non professional methods can be dangerous when disassembling!
I guess as a home inspector when you guys see evidence of poor workmanship it would be a clue to recommend furthur evaluation.