Is this a Part P failure?

[glennuk]

Hi all,

New to the forum! Quick background on me: I have a degree in electrical engineering and spent many years working with qualified electricians on house re-wires. I never qualified as an electrician as I went down the IT route but I can rewire a house with no concerns - not that I would as I'm not qualified!!

A friend of mine asked me to review the electrics on his new extension as he is not happy with the work. Here is what I found:

1. None of the back boxes are earthed. Not a failure but poor practice

2. Loose socket back box and broken light box (missing lug).

3. Ring main cable passing through back of lighting back box ( switch box is level with socket in kitchen).

4. Breakers labelled wrong on the new DB.

5. Live wire sticking out the wall with no termination block! I fixed this one as super dangerous.

6. Live wires sticking out the ceiling with no termination block. Also dangerous but out of reach. Not fixed.

7. Armoured cable missing gland and outer casing not earthed.

8. Light switch in bedroom not screwed in to back box. I fixed this one as dangerous.

Photos attached of some of these. The builder did the electrics and signed it all off. There are a number of issues with the extension- not just the electrics. If I was an inspector I would not have passed it! However, poor practice does not necessarily equate to a Part P failure. So my question is do any of the above actually constitute as a failure?

Thanks in advance,
Glenn

 

[snowhead]

Following the "sign off" by the builder, has,
an Electrical Installation Certificate been issued by the builder,
and also a Building Regulations Compliance Certificate received back from the Local Authority after notification by the builder?

 

[FatAlan]

Hi all,

New to the forum! Quick background on me: I have a degree in electrical engineering and spent many years working with qualified electricians on house re-wires. I never qualified as an electrician as I went down the IT route but I can rewire a house with no concerns - not that I would as I'm not qualified!!

A friend of mine asked me to review the electrics on his new extension as he is not happy with the work. Here is what I found:

1. None of the back boxes are earthed. Not a failure but poor practice

2. Loose socket back box and broken light box (missing lug).

3. Ring main cable passing through back of lighting back box ( switch box is level with socket in kitchen).

4. Breakers labelled wrong on the new DB.

5. Live wire sticking out the wall with no termination block! I fixed this one as super dangerous.

6. Live wires sticking out the ceiling with no termination block. Also dangerous but out of reach. Not fixed.

7. Armoured cable missing gland and outer casing not earthed.

8. Light switch in bedroom not screwed in to back box. I fixed this one as dangerous.

Photos attached of some of these. The builder did the electrics and signed it all off. There are a number of issues with the extension- not just the electrics. If I was an inspector I would not have passed it! However, poor practice does not necessarily equate to a Part P failure. So my question is do any of the above actually constitute as a failure?

Thanks in advance,
Glenn

Sounds like your answering you’re own question. I’d be referring more to BS7671. Is this ‘builder’ a member of a scheme? How was the work notified? Leaving exposed live conductors!

 

[MJPD29]

Just a point, back boxes do not need to be earthed if they have a fixed lug. This is not bad practice in any way.

 

[mainline]

Just a point, back boxes do not need to be earthed if they have a fixed lug. This is not bad practice in any way.

It's not good practice, either.

Not all light switches have an earthing ring.

I would rather fit a fly lead as there is always the chance of the back box becoming live.

 

[MJPD29]

It's not good practice, either.

Not all light switches have an earthing ring.

I would rather fit a fly lead as there is always the chance of the back box becoming live.

Absolutley nothing wrong with it. Please point me to a regulation that states otherwise.

 

[freddo]

What does that armoured cable connect to? The single insulation looks like it is exposed. I hope it's not going directly to the meter!

 

[mainline]

Absolutley nothing wrong with it. Please point me to a regulation that states otherwise.

I didn't say it was a requirement, and I didn't say it was bad practice.
But as said, it's not good practice.
Best practice is to fit a fly lead.
Try reading GN8

 

[Dustydazzler]

Standard install in 2022

Domestic has gone to Sh!t in the last decade of so

 

[glennuk]

The builder is an approved NIC EIC contractor and he has issued the certificate. I just don't understand how he can issue it with live wires sticking out the wall!

And yes the armoured cable connects to the main 100A incomer.

I'm very tempted to report him.

 

[Dustydazzler]

The builder is an approved NIC EIC contractor and he has issued the certificate. I just don't understand how he can issue it with live wires sticking out the wall!

And yes the armoured cable connects to the main 100A incomer.

I'm very tempted to report him.

Waste of time

Just give them a price to do the job properly

 

[littlespark]

Waste of time

Just give them a price to do the job properly

OP cant
Not a practicing electrician.

 

[DefyG]

If the builder/sparks has issued an installation certificate that implies all is compliant with BS7671 and within timescale for building regs, there is no reason why a Part P certificate wont be issued (Did it come straight from the builder/sparks?).
A building inspector wont re-inspect the works done.
Your only recourse is to report it to NICEIC but I dont hold out much hope of them getting involved unless perhaps you can stress how dangerous the live wire situation was.

 

[snowhead]

Send the list to the builder first and see if he has any comments.

 

[brianmoooore]

Your only recourse is to report it to NICEIC but I dont hold out much hope of them getting involved unless perhaps you can stress how dangerous the live wire situation was.

Take more than that. Odd unterminated live wire is fairly standard on new builds these days. Was on the one my son bought, last year.

 

[DefyG]

Take more than that. Odd unterminated live wire is fairly standard on new builds these days. Was on the one my son bought, last year.

Probably tend to agree but how many get reported to NICEIC? I think mostly would get reported to the site agent.
Hopefully the NICEIC would act on one or two of them

 

[mainline]

The builder is an approved NIC EIC contractor and he has issued the certificate. I just don't understand how he can issue it with live wires sticking out the wall!

And yes the armoured cable connects to the main 100A incomer.

I'm very tempted to report him.

Why not contact the contractor and raise the concerns you have with him first.

The Niceic will say the same thing.

 

[brianmoooore]

And yes the armoured cable connects to the main 100A incomer.

Can you post a pic of the whole of the inside of that meter box, please.

 

[Markyd]

Name Him.....Live cables not protected, get him back to the job and stick his tongue on them

 

[nicebutdim]

It's not good practice, either.

Not all light switches have an earthing ring.

I would rather fit a fly lead as there is always the chance of the back box becoming live.

I'd also add that chances of a back box becoming live in NI are significantly lower than in GB as there are few circumstances where cable sheath will be in contact with entry point of box. Cables buried in walls are enclosed in conduit and those in stud walls generally enter boxes through a PVC female adaptor that won't easily dislodge like a grommet might.

 

[mainline]

I'd also add that chances of a back box becoming live in NI are significantly lower than in GB as there are few circumstances where cable sheath will be in contact with entry point of box. Cables buried in walls are enclosed in conduit and those in stud walls generally enter boxes through a PVC female adaptor that won't easily dislodge like a grommet might.

You may find the same sort of spark that doesn't fly lead may also not bother with grommets and say It's absolutely fine.

 

[nicebutdim]

You may find the same sort of spark that doesn't fly lead may also not bother with grommets and say It's absolutely fine.

I've no idea what practices are engaged in GB, but even the most careless spark in NI will ensure cables are suitably protected upon entry to metal boxes and seldom with a flimsy grommet.

The last time grommets were in widespread use for that purpose was back in the days of VIR (which was encased in oval metal conduit when buried). Later installations used oval PVC conduit and this was brought into back boxes. Modern installations used round conduit, either brought into boxes or finshed with an adaptor. Metal boxes in stud walls generally have a PVC bush for entry. This isn't just 'good practice', it's the only acceptable practice here. As such, the chances of a back box becoming live are exceptionally low.

Edit: the point I'm driving at is that one person's idea of good practice can be considered appalling by another. While it may indeed be good practice to have a flylead in metal boxes, it isn't necessarily a requirement and would appear to be the least of issues on the OP's list.

 

[mainline]

I've no idea what practices are engaged in GB, but even the most careless spark in NI will ensure cables are suitably protected upon entry to metal boxes and seldom with a flimsy grommet.

The last time grommets were in widespread use for that purpose was back in the days of VIR (which was encased in oval metal conduit when buried). Later installations used oval PVC conduit and this was brought into back boxes. Modern installations used round conduit, either brought into boxes or finshed with an adaptor. Metal boxes in stud walls generally have a PVC bush for entry. This isn't just 'good practice', it's the only acceptable practice here. As such, the chances of a back box becoming live are exceptionally low.

The thing that peeves me is that a lack of grommets or indeed lack of fly lead will get noted or may even pick up a c3 by the same sparky I've seen not use them.

 

[ipf]

It's not good practice, either.

Not all light switches have an earthing ring.

I would rather fit a fly lead as there is always the chance of the back box becoming live.

You could say that's a matter of opinion....and depends on the state of the
the installation anyway, especially termination wise.
It's a simple topic with loads of consequential 'ifs and 'if nots'.

 

[SJD]

I didn't say it was a requirement, and I didn't say it was bad practice.
But as said, it's not good practice.
Best practice is to fit a fly lead.
Try reading GN8

I've no idea how the above quote got inserted under my name!
Perhaps a Mod could delete it?

 

[brianmoooore]

I don't care what the regs, on site guide, or any of the scams say, I'm with mainline on this one. I do, and always will, connect a fly lead between any metal back box and any earth terminal on a face plate, to ensure maximum safety, even when the face is removed with the power on.

 

[ipf]

Standard install in 2022

Domestic has gone to Sh!t in the last decade of so

Although well on the way down, it certainly dipped pretty quickly after 2005, when Part P came into being.

 

[ipf]

I don't care what the regs, on site guide, or any of the scams say, I'm with mainline on this one. I do, and always will, connect a fly lead between any metal back box and any earth terminal on a face plate, to ensure maximum safety, even when the face is removed with the power on.

So do I, but that's not the point.

 

[brianmoooore]

dipped pretty quickly after 2005, when Part P came into being.

Which is exactly what I predicted would happen at the time. My exact words to a colleague at the time, were "monkeys bodging installations, now become monkeys bodging installations, with a certificate in their hands, saying they are doing it properly "

 

[ipf]

Which is exactly what I predicted would happen at the time. My exact words to a colleague at the time, were "monkeys bodging installations, now become monkeys bodging installations, with a certificate in their hands, saying they are doing it properly "

You're not the only one. It was obvious that standards had been declining for decades. It's just accelerated and it's something we'll never recover from.
I've been on about it on here for 12 years, having seen how things have developed since the 1970's.

 

[Midwest]

You're not the only one. It was obvious that standards had been declining for decades. It's just accelerated and it's something we'll never recover from.
I've been on about it on here for 12 years, having seen how things have developed since the 1970's.

Some of my colleagues were bodging it 40 years ago, so nothing new there.

Edit, make that 60!

 

[glennuk]

Can you post a pic of the whole of the inside of that meter box, please.

Hi,

Photo attached. Every installation of armourded cabling I've seen has a gland on the end which is then earthed (I manage a Datacentre so I see these everywhere!). Never seen one terminated like this.

 

[brianmoooore]

Right, now we can see a clear and definite deviation from the regs, not just some that could be open to interpretation.
You have exposed wires that are only single insulated - the cores of the SWA. All wiring that is not inside an enclosure requires two layers of insulation, like the meter tails. You can see the two layers where they leave the meter. (Also badly done!)

 

[timhoward]

There are several issues there but head and shoulders above the others is:
-Supplier fuse is OCPD device for a sub-main (which presumably exceeds 3m) (questionable CCC)
-lack of earthing/correct installation of SWA
-single insulated conductors accessible

 

[brianmoooore]

Like you say, there are many issues present, but: the 3m rule isn't a reg, and we don't know the length of the SWA. The SWA armour could be earthed elsewhere, but the single insulated wires are a slam dunk.
Think Al Capone. Multiple murders and heinous crimes , undoubtedly, but jailed on income tax evasion charges.

 

[MJPD29]

That swa is a complete mess. Single insulated cores and should probably have a switch fuse fitted too.

 

[littlespark]

Just to be pedantic about it, the basic insulation is technically inside an enclosure that can "only be opened by a tool or a key"

But it is a mess.

How did he cut the armour off that close to the side of the box?
There was plenty of room in there to do it properly.

 

[OnlQQker]

Just a point, back boxes do not need to be earthed if they have a fixed lug. This is not bad practice in any way.

I was always told they should be.
Just in case somebody in the future pulls them away from the wall when wallpapering or something. And the live conductor which isn't through a grommet can touch the metal back box?

 

[DefyG]

Is this a Part P failure?​

I'd say its a bit more than that.
There is no way the distribution circuit (armoured cable install) is compliant with the regs (BS7671) in many ways and its more than a deviation as (my understanding) deviations are permitted if no less safe than set out in the regs. This clearly is not and an installation certificate nor a building reg (Part P) certificate should ever have been issued.

 

[MJPD29]

@OnlQQker if the regulations were followed in the first place this situation would not arise. No untrained person should ever opening a live socket, and if an electrician is opening one a risk assessment is required. The regs are there to prevent the situation arising, not sort out problems after someone has done something dangerous in the future.