Range Oven Isolator Position Deemed Code 1 on a PIR ???

[baldsparkies]

Finally got through but it looks like its down to which regulation you are applying to the isolator.
The definition between an isolator for mechanical maintenance and an isolator for emergency switching would need to be verified through a risk assesment.
I have also spoken to an old safety officer friend, with an electrical consultant I know, and also a fire officer.
One thing is definate, its not a code 1.
As far as a code 2 is concerned. That could actually be applied if it can be proved that the isolation was for emergency purposes.
The primary reason would be to remove a source of ignition following a fire.
The grey area here is most, including fire officers would deem the controls on the front of the appliance suitable for this purpose in most cases.
Concensus seems to be life is more precious than property so GET OUT. The consumer unit is the next viable means of isolation, in any event.
To complicate or maybe help to define the position further (Depending on your point of view) The question was raised!! What about dual fuel Ranges ??
In this instance electrical isolation would fail to remove the source of ignition, (The gas hob would still be burning) In this instance ie dual fuel, the isolation would be even more suited to isolation for maintenance purposes.

The range in question is Dual Fuel, and as such I would deem the isolator code 4 my reason being the location is simply not correct.
Had the range been All electric then to cover myself on a pir I would feel justified in a code 2
My reasoning Dual fuel for isolation for maintenance purposes.
All electric Isolation for maintenance and emergency purposes.

As said the code 1 is a non starter. I am sorry that the answer is not definitive, I really was hoping to get something that would take away the personel opinion scenario that the thread as shown.
Despite long conversations with regulating bodies and informed individuals, its still left with us the sparkies to pick the wood from the trees because you will still get the greys come up, and not black and whites.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Thanks for the update...there often isnt a definitive answer on coding issues...which is why discussions get a bit heated sometimes!

 

[Deleted member 26818]

If after suitable risk assessment, an isolator for emergency switching is deemed necessary.
Such would also apply to the gas/oil part of the range, and could be achieved by the installation of a solinoid.
As for the code 4, again a specific Regulation would have to be breached, before any code is issued.

 

[baldsparkies]

If after suitable risk assessment, an isolator for emergency switching is deemed necessary.
Such would also apply to the gas/oil part of the range, and could be achieved by the installation of a solinoid.
As for the code 4, again a specific Regulation would have to be breached, before any code is issued.

I would agree spin. The selenoid scenario with emergency gas shut off is widely used in commercial installs. Rarely if ever seen on domestic though. Most gas shut off systems are an integral part of the appliance when deemed neccassary.
I must say, getting informed advice on the subject, is a bit like asking a financial advisor about what you should do with a pension. They will advise you but will not commit to making the decision for you. It seems there isnt really a wrong or right answer on this one. You just have to look at all the facts, and come to your own conclusions. Bottom line is, being able to prove your decision was an informed one taking into account all the rellevent factors, and not based solely on a personal opinion.

Very many thanks to all contributing to this thread, and to the mods who run the sight.
It leaves all of us better informed in these days of trying to do the right thing, and keeping our standards up.
As for making a living when the guys with the horses ride off into the sunset with a wadd of cash regardless, Well !! Dont get me started on that one.