Finishing a job thats been taking years

[aaronstuart]

Hi,

I have been asked to fit a cu at a small flat, no supply yet, but the wiring was done by someone else a few years ago and did a runner, but where does that leave me?

Obviously i haven't designed / erected the installation, so what would i put in the certs or is it better for me to walk away.

Regards

 

[sparkyork]

could you not just fit the new consumer then obviously test it all, then for certain areas like "cables routed in prescribed zones" etc etc, put "limited" in these boxes as you dont know. id of thought you would have to check behind accesories as well.

interesting one this wonder what others will say?

rich

 

[Shakey]

Hi,

I have been asked to fit a cu at a small flat, no supply yet, but the wiring was done by someone else a few years ago and did a runner, but where does that leave me?

Obviously i haven't designed / erected the installation, so what would i put in the certs or is it better for me to walk away.

Regards

well to me this is a no brainer

if you use the short form you sign the block that says "I, being responsible for the design, installation etc" then you are responsible for the whole job.

if you use the long form, then someone woul have to sign for design etc (and presumably they wont be)

so, walk away, or be sure that whatever you put your name to is of sufficient standard to avoid the doo doo's hitting the fan in YOUR direction

aalthough there is another alternative

do the CU change, but only put that work on the cert. Think of it like doing a CU change on an existing property with no previous certs

so you would still check main bonding, do your tests etc, but would not be signing for the actual installation work

 

[mdshunk]

It always tickles me to learn how much paperwork you guys seem to be buried in. Here in the states, I wouldn't even give a second thought to changing out the cu ("breaker box", to us here). I'd just make sure that my name was only officially associated with changing, or in this case adding, the cu. Naturally, I'd test and visually examine any portions of the existing wiring to be refed to assure that they're safe to put into use just to cover my own butt, but we're not even required to do even that much in the US.

 

[wattsup]

I agree mdshunk But here in the UK bureaucracy rules, meddling power hungary jobsworths, but anyhow it keeps paper suppliers happy.

 

[EasyFox]

On the easycerts I use there is a section
"details of the installation & extent of installation work covered by this certificate"
Where in this situation I enter installation of consumer unit only. Fit the unit test all circuits job done.

 

[tony.towa]

The general concensus seems to be ensure that your test certificate covers the cu only. Obviously you will carry out your normal tests, as Shakey says, but should you find any anomolies make sure that you inform the customer.

 

[dixon9]

well to me this is a no brainer

if you use the short form you sign the block that says "I, being responsible for the design, installation etc" then you are responsible for the whole job.

if you use the long form, then someone woul have to sign for design etc (and presumably they wont be)

so, walk away, or be sure that whatever you put your name to is of sufficient standard to avoid the doo doo's hitting the fan in YOUR direction

aalthough there is another alternative

do the CU change, but only put that work on the cert. Think of it like doing a CU change on an existing property with no previous certs

so you would still check main bonding, do your tests etc, but would not be signing for the actual installation work

OR (?)...

Fit the CU as Shakey describes and insist that you will only do the work if you can PIR the installation. That way, any remedials is more work and money for you.

 

[aaronstuart]

Many many thanks great advice

cheers all