- Reaction score
- 25,478
This is a fair comment, problem is these days accessories are generally not of the quality they once we're so anything approaching their maximum rating sends them into meltdown.
Discuss No Equipotential Bonding to Water in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
Depends on the size of the immersion element (i.e the wattage)
Personally I am with you.Excuse me for poking my nose in and definitely no offence meant .....but ! I need this answering.
The amount of immersions I have come accross where the fuse has melted the switch fused spur, I've lost count Of.
If voltage is running low ( 230 ). You're immersion's 13A fuse in the switched fused spur, is going to be hot. It will not blow as you know but it can do damage.
I personally ( Heating Engineer, not Electrician), would not be able to bring myself to leave it. It would be a case of telling customer, it needs re-wiring correctly on its own independent supply, 16A breaker and RCD ( or RCBO ) and a 20 A DP switch for customer plus 20 A DP Switch next to immersion.
What are your thoughts ?
Is this over kill ?
Common practise to comply with reg 528.3.4 perhaps.I sense a can of worms being opened. If the service pipe is plastic then any copper connected from is not in contact with true earth and as such is not an extraneous conductive part, it seems to be common practice however to bond it.
I agree, though morally it can be a difficult situation to deal with.As has been pointed out all work - no matter how small - needs the earthing and bonding arrangements to be adequate for the protective measure (ADS). If they are not then this needs to be done. You cannot issue a certificate stating that there is no main protective bonding where it is needed for the work the certificate relates to.
Strictly speaking you should have refused to carry out the work unless and until the main bonding issue was rectified.
I understand all that, but the problem with leaving a Minor Works Cert stating that the main protective bonding is inadequate or non-existant or whatever is that you are actually leaving a document which contradicts itself (because despite what the declaration states it doesn't comply with BS7671) and more importantly you are leaving documentary evidence that you have left the installation in an unsafe condition (backed up by your signature).I agree, though morally it can be a difficult situation to deal with.
There can be situations where by if you walk away you could be leaving a more potentially dangerous situation than no bonding installed.
Ok so by rights you should isolate and lock off until the situation is rectified. But you know as much as we all do in reality this is not going to happen.
Wrong or right, I guess my conscience gets the better of me sometimes, and sticking strictly to the book gets awkward.
As has been pointed out all work - no matter how small - needs the earthing and bonding arrangements to be adequate for the protective measure (ADS). If they are not then this needs to be done. You cannot issue a certificate stating that there is no main protective bonding where it is needed for the work the certificate relates to.
Strictly speaking you should have refused to carry out the work unless and until the main bonding issue was rectified.
I do agree with all these points but the Minor Works asks you to comment on the existing installation, if there is no bonding then comment on it and make its ommission clear to the client and how they should proceed.I understand all that, but the problem with leaving a Minor Works Cert stating that the main protective bonding is inadequate or non-existant or whatever is that you are actually leaving a document which contradicts itself (because despite what the declaration states it doesn't comply with BS7671) and more importantly you are leaving documentary evidence that you have left the installation in an unsafe condition (backed up by your signature).
But the Minor Works Cert is declaring that your work complies with BS 7671:2008 (2015). It clearly doesn't if there is inadequate or non-existant main protective bonding. That's not the purpose of the Comments on Existing Installation section - it's not a means for carrying out non-compliant/unsafe work.I do agree with all these points but the Minor Works asks you to comment on the existing installation, if there is no bonding then comment on it and make its ommission clear to the client and how they should proceed.
So would you issue a certificate for the replacement socket then stating that the installation is not bonded? And if so how is the declaration that the work complies with BS 7671 truthful?If someone however had a seriously broken/dangerous socket I am not going to say, sorry can't do that your water isn't bonded, if as you say there is no means of earthing I would obviously try to resolve this.
Still do Minor Works for record of works.IMO a broken socket is maintenance work, if the water pipe is not bonded, that is irrelevant.
Well yes, but I would not be going round looking at the whole installation , the job is to change a broken socket nothing more nothing less.Still do Minor Works for record of works.
True very true it is just a policy we have but most of our remedials follow EICR so we have already pulled it apartWell yes, but I would not be going round looking at the whole installation , the job is to change a broken socket nothing more nothing less.
Reply to No Equipotential Bonding to Water in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.