Discuss Putting a spur on an old ring in the Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

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

I agree with you sparks if something was deemed safe in the 16th does it suddenly become unsafe with the introduction of the 17th. They need a section to cover all these points, a bit like the giudance notes on what is part P notifiable and what is not. ie what you are duty bound to change and what not.

Thats it,going to bed now the wifes waiting;)
 
Its not your responsibility, Why not refer it to the client and let them make the decision as to whether they want to upgrade it to 17th, the 16th edition ran for long enough with little problem

That would be sensible, but quite a few people are saying that it is "your" responsibility and that if the client does not want to pay for everything to be upgraded in one go you should walk away from the job.

Maybe as someone who is not even an electrician (yet) i shouldn't have an opinion on this but from what i have learnt the bs 7671:2008 are guidelines not statutory regs and so if you do work that improves safety, ie stops the need for trailing leads everywhere, and the new work meets the present regs that must be a sensible and good thing, even if it doesn't do everything at once. It means a client can undertake improvements in small affordable steps. To quote someone "rules are for the guidance of wise men and the blind obedience of fools".

Anyone had advice from the part P schemes (elecsa, napit, niceic etc) on this sort of thing?
 
I like your quote pushrod "Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the blind obediance of fools" At least we are discussing these points on the forum which can only be a good thing.
 
The surface mounted trunking and socket outlet comply with the new regs and don't require RCD protection because they beat the 50mm rule. What you must do however, is on your Minor Works certificate write the circuit down as a departure from the current regs. This does not mean that the circuit is unsafe, it is highly likely that the original circuit was correctly installed under the regs of the time. Anyway the Zs measurement would indicate if the circuit met the new requirements and if RCD protection was required to meet disconnection times.
 
The IET have clarified it in their wiring matters magazine because it was such a grey area. If we 'alter a circuit' then we have to ensure the circuit complies with current regs.

My boss is sending me to an IET seminar next week and 'alterations' are a part of the agenda so I will keep you updated with any info from the horses mouth.

Cheers
Steve
 
Steve,
For a long time the regs have been called "ambigous" in areas, but again a quote on this forum says that the rules are for "the obedience of fools and the guidance of wisemen". Unfortunately that doesn't apply in law and a publication from the IET is just that, a publication. If they amend the regs then that is an entirely different matter and we should comply. But as they are not, my answer fulfills all the requirements of the current regs including the mention of certification which was omitted on most replies. There really should be a publication giving examples such as these for the relatively new spark, as a lot of sparks get embroiled in the regs and do far more than is necessary because they can be difficult to interpret.

As for the IET publication, don't hold your breath. My colleague who is a lecturer, wrote to the IET and NICEIC for clarification when I queried how and what should the cores of a three core cable, (Brown, Black and Grey) be identified when using this cable in single phase application. No answer to date.

I had to inspect a new installation and found the electrical supervisor had snipped the blue core out of a four cable (thats all they could find apparently) and sleeved the grey as neutral and black as cpc. His mate however had used the blue core as neutral at the other end. The supervisors' answer being that, that was the company policy for thee phase cable used in a single phase application.:confused:
 
chris can you clarify
ie replace broken socket
swap a light fitting
fit a dimmer
would these also mean whole circ to comply with 17th
thanks


If you are replacing a broken or dangerous accessory you don’t have to adopt the circuit because you are making it safe. This is maintenance. However if you are simply replacing an accessory then you do.

Ian
 
If you are replacing a broken or dangerous accessory you don’t have to adopt the circuit because you are making it safe. This is maintenance. However if you are simply replacing an accessory then you do.

Ian



Light fittings and switches/sockets can be changed WITHOUT notification or certification.
 
The IET have clarified it in their wiring matters magazine because it was such a grey area. If we 'alter a circuit' then we have to ensure the circuit complies with current regs.

My boss is sending me to an IET seminar next week and 'alterations' are a part of the agenda so I will keep you updated with any info from the horses mouth.

Cheers
Steve

I would be really interested to hear what they have to say about the consumer who wants to improve their installation in stages. eg put a modern safer CU in but not upgrade the lighting circuit even though it does not have an earth a la 14th or 15 th regs; or improve a ring circuit to prevent trailing leads but not rcd protect it because their CU is is old and in a restricted space. I think commonsense would say that if you are extending a circuit you would check the safety of the whole circuit and not just the correctness of the bit you are adding, but to say the whole circuit now has to comply with 17th ed regs is a nonsense! (if for example it was rcd protected but just in the old colours!). Just because an installation does not match bs 7671:2008 it does not mean it is unsafe.
The other thing is that it is the EWA 1989? and the HaSaW act that are statutory, the wiring regs are only guidelines to help installers meet those acts. If the "law" is going to say you should walk away from a job that could make an improvement to an installation because the client can not afford to improve the whole installation then the "law" is an --- (as they say) and should be changed.
 
Apart from how you interperet the regs, if I saw a ring final with only one point protected by an RCD I would consider it an unprofessional installation. If you have gone to the expense of buying an RCD and enclosure why not mount it next to the cu & protect all points on the cct, you have to fully test the ring anyway in order to certify it. You could protect the spur on its own by installing a socket plate with built in RCD but these are generally more expensive than an enclosure type so what would be the point?
 
Sorry to burst your bubble, dkent5, but your answer doesn't fulfill

any of the current regs :)

All socket outlets now require RCD protection, regardless of

installation method!!

RCDs are installed for additional protection against

electric shock, not as a means of meeting disconnection times -

unless, of course, you're working on a TT system, where this can be

done.
 
I believe if you extend the circuit you RCD protect addition, you could consider an RCD socket

Irish
 
Just to throw something else into the ring, I'm currently reading GN3 Insp & Testing for an exam on wednesday.

In the 'Minor Works' section it discusses essential tests to be carried out after the alteration and the precise example they give is where a socket outlet is added to an existing circuit.

It says "(If the circuit is protected by an RCD) verify the effectiveness of the RCD."

It therefore implies that a socket circuit might not necessarily be protected by an rcd.
 
Just to throw something else into the ring, I'm currently reading GN3 Insp & Testing for an exam on wednesday.

In the 'Minor Works' section it discusses essential tests to be carried out after the alteration and the precise example they give is where a socket outlet is added to an existing circuit.

It says "(If the circuit is protected by an RCD) verify the effectiveness of the RCD."

It therefore implies that a socket circuit might not necessarily be protected by an rcd.


It may be a specifically labelled socket for a fridge or such with no rcd protection

It may be under supervision of a skilled/instructed person
The implication that you state would not then apply
 
Last edited:
It may be a specifically labelled socket for a fridge or such with no rcd protection

It may be under supervision of a skilled/instructed person
The implication that you state would not then apply


Yes of course, it's been a long week !
 
I would be really interested to hear what they have to say about the consumer who wants to improve their installation in stages. eg put a modern safer CU in but not upgrade the lighting circuit even though it does not have an earth a la 14th or 15 th regs; or improve a ring circuit to prevent trailing leads but not rcd protect it because their CU is is old and in a restricted space. I think commonsense would say that if you are extending a circuit you would check the safety of the whole circuit and not just the correctness of the bit you are adding, but to say the whole circuit now has to comply with 17th ed regs is a nonsense! (if for example it was rcd protected but just in the old colours!). Just because an installation does not match bs 7671:2008 it does not mean it is unsafe.
The other thing is that it is the EWA 1989? and the HaSaW act that are statutory, the wiring regs are only guidelines to help installers meet those acts. If the "law" is going to say you should walk away from a job that could make an improvement to an installation because the client can not afford to improve the whole installation then the "law" is an --- (as they say) and should be changed.


I went to the seminar yesterday and this sort of question with the new CU came up.
When fitting a consumer unit then you need to ensure that all circuits comply with current regs. In addition, when you certify it, the certificate only lets you certify that it complies with a single version of BS7671. There is no way of saying that one section of the installation complies with 2004 regs and the other complies to 2008 regs. We are therefore obliged to state that the full installation (or at least the circuits that we have been working on) comply with 17th ed.

You mention the old colours - existing wiring can remain as old colours (as long as you display the 'wiring in 2 colours' label at or near the origin), it's not saying that they need replacing or resheathing for new colours.

I accept that the installation may have been working and safe to 15th ed regs for many years, but when you fill in a certificate then it's your responsibility as the duty hold to certify that the circuit complies with current regs.

Unfortunately they are therefore saying that if the customer doesn't want an rcd fitting then we need to walk away - A letter in writing to the customer to recommend an rcd being fitted or a disclaimer in the 'departures' section will not legally cover us.

The fact is, the regs can be cited in a court of law (in defence as well as prosecution) and there is no way around it.

Unfortunately, we all know that if we do walk away from a job like this then Dodgy Bob down the road will happily take on the job.
 
I went to the seminar yesterday and this sort of question with the new CU came up.
When fitting a consumer unit then you need to ensure that all circuits comply with current regs. In addition, when you certify it, the certificate only lets you certify that it complies with a single version of BS7671. There is no way of saying that one section of the installation complies with 2004 regs and the other complies to 2008 regs. We are therefore obliged to state that the full installation (or at least the circuits that we have been working on) comply with 17th ed.

You mention the old colours - existing wiring can remain as old colours (as long as you display the 'wiring in 2 colours' label at or near the origin), it's not saying that they need replacing or resheathing for new colours.

I accept that the installation may have been working and safe to 15th ed regs for many years, but when you fill in a certificate then it's your responsibility as the duty hold to certify that the circuit complies with current regs.

Unfortunately they are therefore saying that if the customer doesn't want an rcd fitting then we need to walk away - A letter in writing to the customer to recommend an rcd being fitted or a disclaimer in the 'departures' section will not legally cover us.

The fact is, the regs can be cited in a court of law (in defence as well as prosecution) and there is no way around it.

Unfortunately, we all know that if we do walk away from a job like this then Dodgy Bob down the road will happily take on the job.

Thanks for the update on what the "law" is Steve. I just can't help but think this is another example of poorly thought out legislation that far from helping bona fide electricians actually works against them, encouraging joe public to go with "dodgy bob" . Work by an experienced and qualified electrician that improves an installation and informs the client in writing as to what further improvements are needed has got to be better than nothing at all, or work by an unqualified inexperienced handyman.

Are there no organisations / unions that can lobby for common sense.

If the government want to improve the quality of electrical work they could just say no sale of certain electrical items unless you show a card proving you are an electrician. Not hard to do, afterall it works for the sale of alcohol to young people.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
better to comlpy with regs now cause if the house is ever tested the cu will have to be changed anyway
 
I have a fused spur connected directly to the consumer unit. That fused spur feeds two double 13A socket outlets and one single 13A socket outlet. Is this legal? What is the limit to the number of socket outlets that may be connected to a fused spur?

Many yhrnks
Tim
 

Reply to Putting a spur on an old ring in the Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

Electrical Forum

Welcome to the Electrical Forum at ElectriciansForums.net. The friendliest electrical forum online. General electrical questions and answers can be found in the electrical forum.
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by Untold Media. Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

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.

I've Disabled AdBlock