Instyle LED Lighting Specialists UK
This official sponsor may provide discounts for members

Discuss Hairdressers in the Business Related area at ElectriciansForums.net

S

stirkytone

Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:  American Electrical Advice Forum

Hi everyone,
I've just set up on my own and after acouple of weeks everything is going ok. I am due to start a refurb of a shop which will reopen as a hairdressers.. its nothing too complicated just sockets and lights and change the board. I am not registerd with anyone yet and its a commercial property do i have to notify anybody of the work i have carried out.
 
uHeat Banner - Forum Discount Available
This official sponsor may provide discounts for members

ian.settle1

-
Mentor
Arms
Depends whether the is a flat above which is of the same meter as the shop. If it is on same meter then it is notifiable to LABC if not your OK.
 
M

mazdaman

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
You mean to say same incoming supply, not same meter. Shops usually have a different tariff than residential metering so will have a separate meter anyway. If a separate incoming supply the flat and shop have there own earthing arrangements and one will not effect the other which in this in this instance will not be notifiable to LABC.
 
You mean to say same incoming supply, not same meter. Shops usually have a different tariff than residential metering so will have a separate meter anyway.
sorry but my fathers salon doesn't, upstairs is on the same meter as down stairs, one bill
 

ian.settle1

-
Mentor
Arms
You mean to say same incoming supply, not same meter. Shops usually have a different tariff than residential metering so will have a separate meter anyway. If a separate incoming supply the flat and shop have there own earthing arrangements and one will not effect the other which in this in this instance will not be notifiable to LABC.
No, I mean one incoming supply with one meter.
 
M

mazdaman

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
It dosent matter how many meters you have, if one common incomming supply feeding shop and flat then LABC need to be informed.

Regards one meter for shop and flat, how do you split the usage out for expenses for your tax return? :eek:It won't be accurate. It would make more sense to have your business energy consumption seperate from the dwelling as you would have two seperate accounts.
 

ian.settle1

-
Mentor
Arms
It dosent matter how many meters you have, if one common incomming supply feeding shop and flat then LABC need to be informed.

Regards one meter for shop and flat, how do you split the usage out for expenses for your tax return? :eek:It won't be accurate. It would make more sense to have your business energy consumption seperate from the dwelling as you would have two seperate accounts.
Thats up to the owner of the shop/flat if they only want one meter for both:rolleyes:
 
S

stirkytone

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
Thanks for the replys, the shop and the flat above both have individual supplies. another thig i have come across though is the buildiing has one incoming water supply and is bonded back to the MET on the flats supply,will this cover the shop as well?
 
S

Shakey

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
It dosent matter how many meters you have, if one common incomming supply feeding shop and flat then LABC need to be informed.

Regards one meter for shop and flat, how do you split the usage out for expenses for your tax return? :eek:It won't be accurate. It would make more sense to have your business energy consumption seperate from the dwelling as you would have two seperate accounts.
where are you getting your information from fella?

you see, i'm a bluff old traditionalist and tend to follow the rules that are laid down

and the rules for this are laid down in Part P of the Building Regulations 2000

and the Approved Document to Part P specifically states if a business premises and a domestic dwelling share a common meter, then they both come under the auspices of Part P.

If they are on seperate meters, then the dwelling does, the business doesnt

Its got [email protected]$K all to do with tax returns or energy consumptions!!!!!:mad:

and if you dont know something, try looking up the answer instead of making it up as you go along, as you are clearly doing:mad:

Thanks for the replys, the shop and the flat above both have individual supplies. another thig i have come across though is the buildiing has one incoming water supply and is bonded back to the MET on the flats supply,will this cover the shop as well?
depends; does it follow all the BS7671 guidleines?

i.e. within 600mm of meter or point of entry to the building, before any junctions etc etc

do a resistance check with a long fly lead if you are not sure, from the water pipes in the hairdressers to the incoming supply.

Personally, I would consider that each dis board needs to bonded to the incoming water / and / or gas (or any other extraneous conductive parts) in their own right
 
Last edited by a moderator:
M

mazdaman

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
where are you getting your information from fella?

you see, i'm a bluff old traditionalist and tend to follow the rules that are laid down

and the rules for this are laid down in Part P of the Building Regulations 2000

and the Approved Document to Part P specifically states if a business premises and a domestic dwelling share a common meter, then they both come under the auspices of Part P.

If they are on seperate meters, then the dwelling does, the business doesnt

Its got [email protected]$K all to do with tax returns or energy consumptions!!!!!:mad:

and if you dont know something, try looking up the answer instead of making it up as you go along, as you are clearly doing:mad:



Well Shakey, Mr bluff old traditionalist get your facts right.

1. I am working to Part P building regs approved doc April 2006 not 2000 as your are!

2. The tax comment I made was a business observation not to do with Part P or the installation, you should read my comments more carefully.

3. Your comment is incorrect that if the dwelling and business are on separate meters then the business does not fall under part P. Incorrect. The meter is purely a measuring instrument and its fixture does not affect or split the two installations.

Part P Approved Document refers to ‘common supply’ NOT ‘common meter’ as you have commented incorrectly. The key word here is common supply not common meter. If there are two meters and two mains cut-outs for dwelling and business but are fed from same ‘common’ supply, ie same service cable then the business still falls under Part P. Why? Because the main earthing connection to the service cable is ‘common’ to both installations so therefore both installations come under Part P. You will not be able to do an earth loop test on the business without disconnecting the earth on the dwelling so will interfering with the dwelling installation so both come under Part P in this case. Only if the dwelling and the business are fed from separate incoming supplies, ie separate service cables including a looped service cable providing separate earthing, will the business not come under Part P.

Mr I am Part P registered have my own electrical contracting company. Previous 27 years with Electricity Board as engineer on power, both distribution and transmission, that’s 240V/415 as it was then to 132kV switching, and commissioning substation earth mats amongst other power related work. Four years spent on metering and tariffs domestic commercial and industrial. So your comments to me “where are you getting your information from fella? Think what you are typing and have the correct facts yourself first and not just ‘make them up’ as you have accused me of doing. My facts are from experience, Part P approved document (April 2006 page 6) not 2000 like you, BS7671 16th edition regulations, electricity supply regulations, electricity at work act, ECA. Need I go on.!! So Mr I have made nothing up but you may want to take an eye test as you are reading meter when it says supply. It makes a big difference.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
B

Bane

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooohhh!!!!

*Looks to Shakey*

"Come on Shakey! Don't let him bitch slap you like that!!!! He said your making it up! He called you Mr.Part P!!!"

*Falls on floor laughing*

"Oh I couldn't quite believe what I was reading there..."

*Re-reads the posts*

Or did you say he was making it up?

*confused*
 
Last edited by a moderator:
R

rumrunner

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #13
hi,
i did a rewire on a shop conversion a few years ago ,it was changed from a large shop into 2 flats and 2 shops ,
the supply was 3 phase and the electric board fitted seperate meters to each ,
they didnt do anything to the supply cable,which i found supprising as it didnt seem very big ,35mm at the most,the shops went on a phase sach and the 2 flats on the other,i think the electric board cheated so they didnt have to put a new supply in,
it was pme earth and i was told to fit a suitable earth block,where the main earth from an isolator had to be connected,i had to fit seperate isolators and then feed the consumer units in 25mm 3core swa ,some guy from the electric board came and told me what to do!
i just had to tell him what the approx load was going to be ,
i guess its not so simple these days
one thing i remember ,apart from each unit having different tenants,was that the shops were on a different tariff,to the flats
does this help?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
R

rumrunner

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #14
On That Particular Job ,all Four Sections Of The Project Had To Have SEPERATE Building Regs Approval ,i Remember There Was A Major Problem With The Drains
One Of The Flats Never Got Finished Because Of It.

The Flats And Shops Were Rated Differently For All Services and had different addresses,one shop was even in a different street(corner plot)

As Far As I Can Remember,one Flat And One Shop Got Sold To One Buyer And The Other Was On The Market As A Seperate Property
Im Sure That The Electric Board Cheated,but I Think The Same Happend Quite A Lot,
This Was About 6 Years Ago ,and Im Sure The Supply Cable Should Have Been Changed.
If It Had Of Been I Suppose All The Units Would Have Been On There Own Supply
Ah Well
 
Last edited by a moderator:
S

Shakey

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #15
where are you getting your information from fella?

you see, i'm a bluff old traditionalist and tend to follow the rules that are laid down

and the rules for this are laid down in Part P of the Building Regulations 2000

and the Approved Document to Part P specifically states if a business premises and a domestic dwelling share a common meter, then they both come under the auspices of Part P.

If they are on seperate meters, then the dwelling does, the business doesnt

Its got [email protected]$K all to do with tax returns or energy consumptions!!!!!:mad:

and if you dont know something, try looking up the answer instead of making it up as you go along, as you are clearly doing:mad:



Well Shakey, Mr bluff old traditionalist get your facts right.

1. I am working to Part P building regs approved doc April 2006 not 2000 as your are!

2. The tax comment I made was a business observation not to do with Part P or the installation, you should read my comments more carefully.

3. Your comment is incorrect that if the dwelling and business are on separate meters then the business does not fall under part P. Incorrect. The meter is purely a measuring instrument and its fixture does not affect or split the two installations.

Part P Approved Document refers to ‘common supply’ NOT ‘common meter’ as you have commented incorrectly. The key word here is common supply not common meter. If there are two meters and two mains cut-outs for dwelling and business but are fed from same ‘common’ supply, ie same service cable then the business still falls under Part P. Why? Because the main earthing connection to the service cable is ‘common’ to both installations so therefore both installations come under Part P. You will not be able to do an earth loop test on the business without disconnecting the earth on the dwelling so will interfering with the dwelling installation so both come under Part P in this case. Only if the dwelling and the business are fed from separate incoming supplies, ie separate service cables including a looped service cable providing separate earthing, will the business not come under Part P.

Mr I am Part P registered have my own electrical contracting company. Previous 27 years with Electricity Board as engineer on power, both distribution and transmission, that’s 240V/415 as it was then to 132kV switching, and commissioning substation earth mats amongst other power related work. Four years spent on metering and tariffs domestic commercial and industrial. So your comments to me “where are you getting your information from fella? Think what you are typing and have the correct facts yourself first and not just ‘make them up’ as you have accused me of doing. My facts are from experience, Part P approved document (April 2006 page 6) not 2000 like you, BS7671 16th edition regulations, electricity supply regulations, electricity at work act, ECA. Need I go on.!! So Mr I have made nothing up but you may want to take an eye test as you are reading meter when it says supply. It makes a big difference.
Ok Mazdaman,

sorry for the way i 'went at you', bad day and all that

I have no wish to fight, so lets keep this simple, and maybe we can all beneifit from it.

Firstly I have no idea what the 2000 version of the approved document looks like, seeing as it was origianally released in 2005! Additionally, what is the relevance of BS7671, ESQR's or EAWR's (I presume that's what you meant by 'electricity at work act)?

regardless of the requirement to comply with Part P, the installations should comply with BS7671 (and by default, the EAWR's), and as you well know, there is no mention of Part P in these documents.

And the ECA? As in the Electrical Contractors Association? That's like saying 'NICEIC' said so - and you know that neither have any authority.

Ok back to the point in question, I concede that the 2006 Approved Document DOES say 'common supply' not 'common meter'

However, it does not elaborate any further.

Hopefully you will have read the posts, and I can assure you, you are (in my experience) in an extremelly small minority with your point of view (as in a minority of one)

The posts from Access Training were particularly interesting, what is your view of the points made? I cannot see any way that your 'common service cable' view point would be able to work on a practical or legislative level

Now in the abscence of any further evidence on the subject, I would refer you to the 'Electricians Guide to the Building Regulations'

This is authored and published by the IEE (now the IET) who, as you know, author and publish BS7671

I would say that gives them a 'bit of clout';)

Anyway:

Page 15 para 1.3.2 Scope of Part P

"Part P applies to electrical installations in buildings or parts of buildings comprising:

(ii) dwellings and business premises that have a common METERED SUPPLY - for example shops and public houses with a flat above with a COMMON METER"

The following page Fig 1.3.2 there are anumber of diagrams which helpfully show that is the meter, not the 'service cable' that is the common factor

and in case there is any lingering doubt it states clearly below it


"Part P does NOT apply to:

(i) business premises in the same building as dwellings with SEPERATE METERING"




Ok, is there anything further to add?

Dont think so

Like I said, dont wanna fight, but if you have a better counter argument to your lone position, please, I would like to here it, we are all here to learn after all;)


Note to the Master, Bane

Am I 'un-bitch slapped' now:p
 
B

Bane

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #16
I think you own MazdaMan, Shakey. :)

"Hopefully you will have read the posts, and I can assure you, you are (in my experience) in an extremelly small minority with your point of view (as in a minority of one)"

^^^^^^^^^
VERY FUNNY :)
 
R

rumrunner

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #17


HERES SOME BULLETS FOR THE GUN YOURE LOADING ,BANE;)
 
M

mazdaman

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #18
Ok Shakey I accept your apology, let’s shake hands and move on and work together.

I have noted your quotes re the 'Electricians Guide to the Building Regulations'
You refer to Page 15 para 1.3.2 Scope of Part P

I must have a different copy than you because on mine its on page 25, section 5.4. and reads as follows:

‘THE SCOPE OF PART P

Examples of the application of Part P include electrical installations in buildings or parts of buildings comprising:
Dwelling houses and flats
Dwellings and business premises that have a common supply – for example shops and public houses with a flat above:

Yes that’s right mine says ‘common supply’ not ‘common metering’.
I think between us we may have found the route cause of confusion, a misprint in one of the publications. I assume the misprint is in your copy because mine corresponds to the part P approved document as you have confirmed says ‘common supply’.

I assume you have the green book. The one I have is white and is a joint publication between the NICEIC and the ECA endorsed by the DSA and LABC

Perhaps Mr Access Training can check this out if you have copies of both publications and anyone else on here that has a copy of either book.
Your write Mr Training this is getting interesting, but I still stand by my comments that the supply is the cable not the meter.

Confusion here is that the meter is the demarcation point between the supplier and the installation and may be regarded as the ‘point of supply’. In fact the definition from the Electricity Supply Regulations is ‘supply terminals’ but not ‘supply’.

I have other examples I could explain but before we go any further lets clarify if there is a misprint in either publication as I have mentioned above.

Anyone got the Electrical Installers Guide to the Building Regulations? Would appreciate what comment yours reads, ‘common metering’ or ‘common supply’, under the heading The Scope of Part P. Please indicate which book/ publisher.
 
R

rumrunner

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #19
Part P applies to electrical installations in buildings comprising:


.
dwelling houses and flats
.


dwellings and business premises that have a common supply . for example shops and public
houses that have a shop above;
.


common access areas in blocks of flats such as corridors and staircases;
.


shared amenities of blocks of flats such as laundries and gymnasiums.
Part P applies also to parts of the above electrical installations:
.


in or on land associated with the buildings . for example Part P applies to fixed lighting and pond
pumps in gardens;
. in outbuildings such as sheds, detached garages and greenhouses.
Amicus Technical Bulletin November 2004
AMICUS technical bullitin 2004,
.....................................................................................................................
as you can see my version says this ,hope that doesnt confuse things to much.
for some reason this didnt paste quite right but i have the whole amicus document on pdf,but i does say common supply.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
S

Shakey

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #20
Ok Shakey I accept your apology, let’s shake hands and move on and work together.

I have noted your quotes re the 'Electricians Guide to the Building Regulations'
You refer to Page 15 para 1.3.2 Scope of Part P

I must have a different copy than you because on mine its on page 25, section 5.4. and reads as follows:

‘THE SCOPE OF PART P

Examples of the application of Part P include electrical installations in buildings or parts of buildings comprising:
Dwelling houses and flats
Dwellings and business premises that have a common supply – for example shops and public houses with a flat above:

Yes that’s right mine says ‘common supply’ not ‘common metering’.
I think between us we may have found the route cause of confusion, a misprint in one of the publications. I assume the misprint is in your copy because mine corresponds to the part P approved document as you have confirmed says ‘common supply’.

I assume you have the green book. The one I have is white and is a joint publication between the NICEIC and the ECA endorsed by the DSA and LABC

Perhaps Mr Access Training can check this out if you have copies of both publications and anyone else on here that has a copy of either book.
Your write Mr Training this is getting interesting, but I still stand by my comments that the supply is the cable not the meter.

Confusion here is that the meter is the demarcation point between the supplier and the installation and may be regarded as the ‘point of supply’. In fact the definition from the Electricity Supply Regulations is ‘supply terminals’ but not ‘supply’.

I have other examples I could explain but before we go any further lets clarify if there is a misprint in either publication as I have mentioned above.

Anyone got the Electrical Installers Guide to the Building Regulations? Would appreciate what comment yours reads, ‘common metering’ or ‘common supply’, under the heading The Scope of Part P. Please indicate which book/ publisher.
Ok, glad we are moving on

I think the book you have is a different book

The IEE's Electrcian's Guide to the Building Regs has, and always has had, a green cover.

the problem is many of the documents refer to 'common supply', do you have any that sepcifically refer to 'common service cable'?

My IEE book has 5 VERY clear diagrams, to avoid any confusion

On each diagram they specifically label the source of electricity supplly, the electricity supply meter, and the intake switchgear

Interestingly, four of the diagrams are shop/ flat type examples, and the meter is FIRST, then the 'Source of electricity supply' is next. The remaining diagram is of a block of flats, then its

Intake switch gear - then source of electricity supply then meter IN EACH FLAT

in each diagram they clearly show that if there is one 'service cable' but seperate meters, thren each metered supply is shown as coming under Part P in its own right. Indeed, in the flats example, there is a business unit on the ground floor, which is NOT under Part P, despite being on the same 'service cable' as the rest of the building - which completely follws Access Training's argument

these other diagrams clearly show one meter, both under Part P, seperate meters Business not Part P, dwelling is Part P

I honestly believe that the intention is always the meter, and the examples used by Access Training clearly show that this is the only way it could practically work.

Those documents that state 'common supply' are, to me, following the IEE's lead in that the supply is specifically TO THE BUSINESS/DWELLING CONCERNED, ie AFTER the meter.

If you can find anything conclusive that differentiates, in writing, that they are specifically referring to the service cable, then please, I need to see it (so would i suspect the IEE and every other electrician I have ever discussed this with)

Also, as a tutor on the EAL DEI course, which includes module 001 - Applicable Building Regs for Electrical Installations, if you are correct, I would have a great many students to contact!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
W

wayne

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #21
while this topic barely touches upon anything i deal with ,its good to read and informative ,
cheers
 
M

mazdaman

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #22
Shakey, lets look as some examples from your perspective.

Scenario

You are saying that the number of meters equals the number of supplies.

Let move away from Part P for a moment and look at some examples of what you are saying.

1. A factory has a 3-phase motor and there are 3 separate meters one per phase. You are saying that the premises have 3 supplies? If the three meters are replaced by one poly-phase (3-phase) meter then the number of supplies has been reduced to one.

2. What would you define as the supply if you had an un-metered installation??? i.e. street lighting, traffic signals and signs, remote and underground water authority pumping stations where these installations are on a fixed load tariff?
Your definition is that it would not have a supply as there is no meter!

Getting back to Part P

3. A landlord has premises with 3-phase, one phase feeds a business and the other two feed two flats. Each phase has its own meter. The business is outside the scope of part P because it is metered separately from the flats. Electrical work is carried out on the business by a non registered part P electrician. Some time later the landlord decides to install his own private meters to his tenants and instructs the electricity company to replace the 3 separate meters to one poly-phase, (3-phase) meter. Building work is planed for the premises and a LABC officer visits’ the site and notices that electrical work has been carried out on the business and sees that it has one meter. Oh dear, I would not like to be in that electricians shoes!! So Shakley how would you explain this situation to the LABC officer???

4. If a domestic dwelling has two meters, one for ‘normal’ and one ‘off peak’, your definition is that it has two supplies.

A bit more closely to home now

The electrical certificate that we all fill in, or should do, there is a section with the heading ‘Supply characteristics’’ where the type of supply has to be identified and recorded. Ie , TN-S, TN-C-S, TT. The main fuse rating and type. No reference is made or recorded with respect to the meters. That’s because the meters have no significant to the installation or the supply. If they did the meter type /number of meters would be recorded. The meter in fact is the only part of the installation and supply details NOT to be recorded on the certificate. That’s because it is irrelevant and transparent to both the supply and installation. Its only purpose is for billing.

You are taking to much notice of the guide book which we have determined has miss printed text. It is only a guide after all and any publication can have mistakes even from the IET formally IEE. Look at how many amendments there are following publication the wiring regulations, rephrasing because of misunderstanding. Part P is new and there are likely to be more teething problems and errors than if it had been published several years ago.

And finally, throw that book away it has been withdrawn as it is now a withdrawn standard. See below.

BIP 2082:2005 - WITHDRAWN

Electrician's Guide to the Building Regulations. Including approved Document P: Electrical Safety in Dwellings
Categories:
Electricity supply systems

WARNING: This is a WITHDRAWN standard
Please click here to view more information about withdrawn standards
BSi code: BIP 2082:2005
ISBN number: 0 86341 463 X
Product code: 30132400
Publication Date: 1st Mar 2005

I told you so. I hope the penny has dropped shakey and the rest.

Shakey and Bane I might be the minority as you both commented and you should both be politicians as they rely on votes. I am an electrical engineer and I count on facts, feasibility and above all common sense. By the way Bane, does Shakey own me now????
 
S

Shakey

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #23
Shakey, lets look as some examples from your perspective.

Scenario

You are saying that the number of meters equals the number of supplies.

Let move away from Part P for a moment and look at some examples of what you are saying.

1. A factory has a 3-phase motor and there are 3 separate meters one per phase. You are saying that the premises have 3 supplies? If the three meters are replaced by one poly-phase (3-phase) meter then the number of supplies has been reduced to one.

2. What would you define as the supply if you had an un-metered installation??? i.e. street lighting, traffic signals and signs, remote and underground water authority pumping stations where these installations are on a fixed load tariff?
Your definition is that it would not have a supply as there is no meter!

Getting back to Part P

3. A landlord has premises with 3-phase, one phase feeds a business and the other two feed two flats. Each phase has its own meter. The business is outside the scope of part P because it is metered separately from the flats. Electrical work is carried out on the business by a non registered part P electrician. Some time later the landlord decides to install his own private meters to his tenants and instructs the electricity company to replace the 3 separate meters to one poly-phase, (3-phase) meter. Building work is planed for the premises and a LABC officer visits’ the site and notices that electrical work has been carried out on the business and sees that it has one meter. Oh dear, I would not like to be in that electricians shoes!! So Shakley how would you explain this situation to the LABC officer???

4. If a domestic dwelling has two meters, one for ‘normal’ and one ‘off peak’, your definition is that it has two supplies.

A bit more closely to home now

The electrical certificate that we all fill in, or should do, there is a section with the heading ‘Supply characteristics’’ where the type of supply has to be identified and recorded. Ie , TN-S, TN-C-S, TT. The main fuse rating and type. No reference is made or recorded with respect to the meters. That’s because the meters have no significant to the installation or the supply. If they did the meter type /number of meters would be recorded. The meter in fact is the only part of the installation and supply details NOT to be recorded on the certificate. That’s because it is irrelevant and transparent to both the supply and installation. Its only purpose is for billing.

You are taking to much notice of the guide book which we have determined has miss printed text. It is only a guide after all and any publication can have mistakes even from the IET formally IEE. Look at how many amendments there are following publication the wiring regulations, rephrasing because of misunderstanding. Part P is new and there are likely to be more teething problems and errors than if it had been published several years ago.

And finally, throw that book away it has been withdrawn as it is now a withdrawn standard. See below.

BIP 2082:2005 - WITHDRAWN

Electrician's Guide to the Building Regulations. Including approved Document P: Electrical Safety in Dwellings
Categories:
Electricity supply systems

WARNING: This is a WITHDRAWN standard
Please click here to view more information about withdrawn standards
BSi code: BIP 2082:2005
ISBN number: 0 86341 463 X
Product code: 30132400
Publication Date: 1st Mar 2005

I told you so. I hope the penny has dropped shakey and the rest.

Shakey and Bane I might be the minority as you both commented and you should both be politicians as they rely on votes. I am an electrical engineer and I count on facts, feasibility and above all common sense. By the way Bane, does Shakey own me now????
Mazdaman

when did we establish there has been a misprint in the book? The book I have is very clear, did they 'misprint' the diagrams as well?

Of course the supply is what is coming in, but we are determining what the supply is quite specifiaclly for determining the boundaries and remit of Part P

And for everytime you stated "your defenition", please replace with "most electricians defintions, including the IEE/IET)

and of course we can all find holes in each others argument - but it is about Part P, and as your examples 1 & 2 are clearly outside of Part P, they are ireelevent to this discussion

dont see your reasoning with example 3

when the work was carried out 'MY' reasoning applied and the business was not under Part P

the fact that changing of the metering may/or may not bring it under Part P in the future is ireelevent.

Thats like saying "yes you complied with the 16th edition, but what happens when the 17th comes in"

and as we know, the the rules regulations in foce 'on the day' are what counts, not any future changes

and the 'guide book', written by the same people that wrote the regs that we all follow, really my friend, you are clearly set on your path.

I dont think ANYTHING could convince you otherwise

i have still not seen any document that backs up your theory, but I have shown a document that clearly backs up mine

If you just stand there and say 'yes but its a missprint, its wrong', then really, there is nothing more to say

Bottom line is, sparks does work on a pub, on seperate meter to flat above. Like every sparks I have met, he would say its not under Part P. So LABC come out because of the general building work, and tell the spark it DOES come under part p because its on a common 'service cable'.

Has this ever happened. EVER? Somehow, I dont think so

Stay as you are my friend, its your position, and your entitiled to it

think you will be lonely though.........;)
 
R

rumrunner

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #24
Bottom line is, sparks does work on a pub, on seperate meter to flat above. Like every sparks I have met, he would say its not under Part P. So LABC come out because of the general building work, and tell the spark it DOES come under part p because its on a common 'service cable'.

Shakey if the above has a common supply (ie cable) not meter ,but a common supply then it will come under part p, same for a shop. that bit is quite clear.

its all bull though just do what you like, everyone ,sod the regs ,i think ill start a feedom from the sh~t campaign.
 
S

Shakey

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #25
Bottom line is, sparks does work on a pub, on seperate meter to flat above. Like every sparks I have met, he would say its not under Part P. So LABC come out because of the general building work, and tell the spark it DOES come under part p because its on a common 'service cable'.

Shakey if the above has a common supply (ie cable) not meter ,but a common supply then it will come under part p, same for a shop. that bit is quite clear.

its all bull though just do what you like, everyone ,sod the regs ,i think ill start a feedom from the sh~t campaign.
No Rum, it isnt quite clear at all

they may be on a common service cable ( and they may not), but for Part P purposes the 'supply' is what the individual part of the bulidng recieves AFTEr the meter

so seperate meters, (regardless of common or individual service cables), businees not under Part P, flat is

and yes, its all crap, 'cos none of this has ANYTHING to do with BS7671!
 
M

mazdaman

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #26
Shakey we didn't confirm any printing mistake in the book. I was assuming, as my book , which hasn't been withdrawn, and says 'common supply' the same as the Part P approved document and same as rumrunner. As for definitions which have been round the electricity industry for many years, you can't change the term 'supply' or any other definition between installations for the sake of Part P. I am not saying that the inspector will say 'common service cable' I was referring in earlier comment that the 'common supply' refers to the supply to the premise, ie service cable. The meter is the demarcation point as you have rightly said but are the 'supply terminals' not ‘supply’ as per electricity supply regulations'. See below.
If the document said ‘common terminals’ you would be correct as this is the meter and point of delivery to consumer.

Definitions from supply regulations



'supply' means supply with energy to premises other than those on which it was generated.


"supply terminals" means the ends of the electric lines situated upon any consumer's premises at which the supply is delivered and, unless otherwise agreed in writing, where a meter is employed to register the value of the supply and is directly connected to those lines, means the terminals of that meter furthest from the installation of the owner of that meter;


I think we will see a lot of changes and amendments to part P because it does cause a lot of confusion even to LABC inspectors.


We'll have to a agree to disagree on this one Shakey, but I do agree with you and rumrunner that it's all crap and there are improvements required by the rule makers to iron out much of the confusion that part P has caused.
 
R

rumrunner

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #27
Yeah ,might as well let Bane write the rules, at least they would be more fun to read.
 
S

Shakey

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #28
Shakey we didn't confirm any printing mistake in the book. I was assuming, as my book , which hasn't been withdrawn, and says 'common supply' the same as the Part P approved document and same as rumrunner. As for definitions which have been round the electricity industry for many years, you can't change the term 'supply' or any other definition between installations for the sake of Part P. I am not saying that the inspector will say 'common service cable' I was referring in earlier comment that the 'common supply' refers to the supply to the premise, ie service cable. The meter is the demarcation point as you have rightly said but are the 'supply terminals' not ‘supply’ as per electricity supply regulations'. See below.
If the document said ‘common terminals’ you would be correct as this is the meter and point of delivery to consumer.

Definitions from supply regulations



'supply' means supply with energy to premises other than those on which it was generated.


"supply terminals" means the ends of the electric lines situated upon any consumer's premises at which the supply is delivered and, unless otherwise agreed in writing, where a meter is employed to register the value of the supply and is directly connected to those lines, means the terminals of that meter furthest from the installation of the owner of that meter;


I think we will see a lot of changes and amendments to part P because it does cause a lot of confusion even to LABC inspectors.


We'll have to a agree to disagree on this one Shakey, but I do agree with you and rumrunner that it's all crap and there are improvements required by the rule makers to iron out much of the confusion that part P has caused.
well said Mazdaman

If we, the people at the coal face, experienced and qualified engineers, cannot agree on the interpretation of the available documents, then what chance has the non-electrical LABC inspector got?

And we have the advantage, in that if either you or I were to work to our defintions, it would take an LABC with some BIG kahunas to try and over ride us on a technical issue!:D
 
B

Bane

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #29
"Yes Mazdaman. You are still the sole property of one, Mr.Shakey. Except on Tuesdays. When you are mine"
 
T

The Electrical Connection

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #30
Agree with Shakey.............do it right or not at all.don't guess...check
 
S

Shakey

  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #31
"Yes Mazdaman. You are still the sole property of one, Mr.Shakey. Except on Tuesdays. When you are mine"
Bane, why Tuesday? I freekin hate Tuesday, its a nothing day

I like Saturdays me, got a stinking 'Bow hangover, she is in work, and Shakey has got Shakey blasting out on my Denon system:D
 
Scolmore Electrical Products
This official sponsor may provide discounts for members

Reply to Hairdressers in the Business Related area at ElectriciansForums.net

Top Bottom