Sockets on a lighting circuit - C3 or C2?

[Intoelectrics]

Here it probably has no danger.

But if it could be mistaken for a normal power outlet and so trip out all lights at night due to someone plugging in a heater then I would argue it had a danger to it.

I would argue its an inconvenience rather than a danger. Yes we can all imagine scenarios where the sudden loss of lighting could cause an issue. But we can do the same for many scenarios (as previously stated) Provided the OCPD is correct for the circuit design I believe its fine. I have done this myself previously, especially if the client wanted the flexibility.

As mentioned perhaps a label would suffice?

 

[Rockingit]

C3 just to show you have seen it and educated the client. Doesnt fail the install but covers you if anything occurs

Rubbish. On what engineering basis does it require and justify an improvement?

 

[Intoelectrics]

C3 just to show you have seen it and educated the client. Doesnt fail the install but covers you if anything occurs

What improvement would you recommend other than a label? You could swap them out to FCU's or blank them off but are these an improvement?
I'm not criticising I'm just asking, thinking out loud so to speak.

 

[UNG]

C3 just to show you have seen it and educated the client. Doesnt fail the install but covers you if anything occurs

You can make an observation it does not have to have a code attached to it

 

[UNG]

What improvement would you recommend other than a label? You could swap them out to FCU's or blank them off but are these an improvement?
I'm not criticising I'm just asking, thinking out loud so to speak.

To continue the circle if you swap them for FCU's how would you plug in a 13A plugin lighting adapter that most manufacturers supply these days

 

[westward10]

Some things are worth worrying about, this doesn't.

 

[Dartlec]

Thanks for the thoughts - it's always interesting to see other's views and 'calibrate' my decisions so that I'm happy I'm not too strict or too lax on EICRs.

In this case I think I'll still blank them - it's an unstaffed HMO with quite short term tenants that has had problems before with tenants not necessarily behaving in the most sensible way - so best to try and avoid the room lighting going out if possible. There's zero chance of pelmet lighting ever being installed, and if it was, I'd be the one doing it anyway....

Crappy rewire job done 5 years ago TBH, by an NICEIC DI.

The surveyor for the remortgage even picked up several things, including lack of cable clipping and a poorly extended cooker circuit.

Looks like I'll have to run water bonding too - the water pipe seems to come in from next door (old Victorian terraced house) and resistance check pipe to MET is ~14kOhm, so extraneous if using the 10ma limit test, though not if using 30mA.

Naturally the previous EIC had water bonding ticked, even though there is clearly not a bonding cable leaving the cupboard!

 

[DPG]

Thanks for the thoughts - it's always interesting to see other's views and 'calibrate' my decisions so that I'm happy I'm not too strict or too lax on EICRs.

In this case I think I'll still blank them - it's an unstaffed HMO with quite short term tenants that has had problems before with tenants not necessarily behaving in the most sensible way - so best to try and avoid the room lighting going out if possible. There's zero chance of pelmet lighting ever being installed, and if it was, I'd be the one doing it anyway....

Crappy rewire job done 5 years ago TBH, by an NICEIC DI.

The surveyor for the remortgage even picked up several things, including lack of cable clipping and a poorly extended cooker circuit.

Looks like I'll have to run water bonding too - the water pipe seems to come in from next door (old Victorian terraced house) and resistance check pipe to MET is ~14kOhm, so extraneous if using the 10ma limit test, though not if using 30mA.

Naturally the previous EIC had water bonding ticked, even though there is clearly not a bonding cable leaving the cupboard!


View attachment 100899

View attachment 100900

Wow, that's definitely unsupported cabling !

 

[Dustydazzler]

Wow, that's definitely unsupported cabling !

Someone left without putting up the trunking

 

[Lister1987]

Rubbish. On what engineering basis does it require and justify an improvement?

I'd be asking why it was done that way in the first place?

What improvement would you recommend other than a label? You could swap them out to FCU's or blank them off but are these an improvement?
I'm not criticising I'm just asking, thinking out loud so to speak.

I know UNG raises the point that it's not bad workmanship but it just doesn't sit right; if it is there for a specific purpose then yes (S)FCU it as it removes the "Ohh a plug, just what I need for the roof decorations at Christmas. If it is there for a set purpose then give it a standard radial with standalone OCPD.

You can make an observation it does not have to have a code attached to it

As C3 does naff all to the end result of the EICR I see no harm in attaching a code to it. I know there are various softwares out there that give a CO (Comment Only) option but I refer to earlier; if it doesn't fail it then why not use what is already there?

I respect the opinions of my fellow peers and on most points, will take their advises and counter-arguments and constructive comments but I dunno, it doesn't sit with me, hence my approach, maybe it's just naivety with lack of real world experience, who knows

What is engineering judgement to one person could be --------, -------s and baloney to the next but that is why I love this place; many minds coming together and debating basic stuff.

 

[westward10]

People in the UK have a problem with mixing socket outlets and lighting on the same circuit, it isn't convention therefore it is wrong but it isn't.

 

[UNG]

I'd be asking why it was done that way in the first place?

Would that not be clear and obvious to you at the point of inspection as the OP found out

I know UNG raises the point that it's not bad workmanship but it just doesn't sit right; if it is there for a specific purpose then yes (S)FCU it as it removes the "Ohh a plug, just what I need for the roof decorations at Christmas.

Have you not been reading all the posts in this thread where the likely reason for the installation of sockets on the lighting circuit rather than FCU's has been mentioned and discussed

If it is there for a set purpose then give it a standard radial with standalone OCPD.

If it is there for lighting then why not connect it to the local lighting circuit putting a separate circuit with it's own OCPD would then have two circuits in one light switch again not codeable but probably presents a greater danger to a dabbling Mr DIY

As C3 does naff all to the end result of the EICR I see no harm in attaching a code to it. I know there are various softwares out there that give a CO (Comment Only) option but I refer to earlier; if it doesn't fail it then why not use what is already there?

A C3 is a code like it or not so a "Code C3 – Improvement recommended" what improvement are you going to recommend when you cant plug a lighting adaptor / driver into an FCU

I respect the opinions of my fellow peers and on most points, will take their advises and counter-arguments and constructive comments but I dunno, it doesn't sit with me, hence my approach, maybe it's just naivety with lack of real world experience, who knows

While it might not "sit with you" it is what it is, the real problem is we have to work with what the manufacturers supply which is genearlly all down to cost but also down to what Mr DIY can easily fit

What is engineering judgement to one person could be --------, -------s and baloney to the next but that is why I love this place; many minds coming together and debating basic stuff.

From a coding point of view there really isn't much to discuss but it does highlight what maybe an over zealous inspector that acts with a coding before considering why and whether there are any better or alternative solutions that could have been offered or installed

This is one of those situations where a coding may be called out and subsequently the quality of the EICR and inspector called into question

 

[Intoelectrics]

I know UNG raises the point that it's not bad workmanship but it just doesn't sit right; if it is there for a specific purpose then yes (S)FCU it as it removes the "Ohh a plug, just what I need for the roof decorations at Christmas. If it is there for a set purpose then give it a standard radial with standalone OCPD

I know what you are saying, because the sockets were installed for a certain intended purpose. But the truth is does it really matter? The position of the sockets alone is a limiting factor and so they are not likely to be used regularly for anything that is likely to overload the circuit.

Provided the circuit has been design and installed with the correct OCPD in place and working then the circuit is safe to use and doesn't present a danger.

So if Bob comes along with his 3kw fan heaters and decided to use the sockets, the OCPD will operate and protect the circuit from overload. If Bob plugs in his Christmas lights and the circuit remains energised then the lights are unlikely to be overloading the circuit. A simple label to state the intended use of the circuit or non-use of the circuit will advise against incorrect use. If the consumer decides to ignore this and continue to overload the circuit or attempt to bypass the OCPD then that's their idiocy and they will have to deal with the consequences.

We are electricians not bay sitters, our duty is to install safe systems to a standard guided by the BS7671 regs . We can't and shouldn't second guess every single possible scenario, just a little thought on the most likely ones.

 

[pc1966]

People in the UK have a problem with mixing socket outlets and lighting on the same circuit, it isn't convention therefore it is wrong but it isn't.

Before AM2 the regs made a distinction between "lighting circuits" and "power circuits" in terms of cable selection in Table 52.3 where 1mm could be used for lights and according to Note 4 "associated small items of current-using equipment, such as a bathroom extractor fan", but you had to use 1.5mm for general power circuits.

Now in AM2 that has been dropped along with 'Note 4' which sort of makes sense, as you could have the absurd situation of stand alone smoke alarms having to be wired in 1.5mm but if fed off lights then 1mm was fine!

As I already said, I have no issue with sockets on light circuits for use with lights (so 5A round pin, or some roof-like location) or for dedicated low-power stuff like TV antenna amplifiers where no other power circuit was available, but consider it bad practice to have sockets that to any of the public look like they can be used for generic 13A loads but actually can't and also take out the lights in the process.

Edit: Also 512.1.2 on design current.

 

[Intoelectrics]

As I already said, I have no issue with sockets on light circuits for use with lights (so 5A round pin, or some roof-like location) for dedicated low-power stuff like TV antenna amplifiers, but consider it bad practice to have sockets that to any of the public look like they can be used for generic 13A loads but actually can't and also take out the lights in the process.

I get this, though if the lights come with a standard plug then you have the same situation if you installed FCU's where the plug requires removing/changing. I think maybe the electrician when installing should consider the position and so the likelihood of the sockets being used for other than their intended purpose.

Personally where possible I would try and mount them where they are not that practically accessible for general everyday use. This in my mind would satisfy good practice.

 

[pc1966]

Personally where possible I would try and mount them where they are not that practically accessible for general everyday use. This in my mind would satisfy good practice.

100% this!

Edit: Labels are good as well, and given how modern labelling machines produce good professional-looking results it is not too much to put "Lights Only" or similar on any such socket.

 

[Taylortwocities]

The fact is that BS7671 lists a number of items that shall be connected to a lighting circuit. Can't remember exactly the reg, somewhere around 559.6 maybe....
The items include socket-outlets to BS1363-2, FCUs and other things.

So it is specifically permitted. Absolutely it carries NO comment, not even a C3 as it COMPLIES with the regulations.

Yes, it is possible that someone might plug a MIG welder in to the socket. If it makes you feel better, pop a label on it to say "maximum load 6amps".....But there is no danger whatsoever.

 

[westward10]

I tested a dive of a B&B probably 25 odd years ago in sunny Wellingborough. The loft had been turned into a room and all sockets had stickers on them stating 5A max. I discovered these had all been tagged from the lighting circuit all two core with no cpc.

 

[7029 dave]

TUT TUT , well its not just about BS7671 is it, come on people remember your days at the local tech college, its about adhering to the electrical craft principles we were all taught.
My tutors would be have a fit if they heard some of the comments going on here.
Practically IMO its not good for a circuit to be running over its CCC even if it only for a few seconds with big loads being plugged in untill its goes pop.
Then you could argue that being plunged in total darkness could warrant a C2 for safety reasons in some certain circumstances.
It would be a C3 for me all day long. We dont mix power with lighting circuits.

 

[DPG]

TUT TUT , well its not just about BS7671 is it, come on people remember your days at the local tech college, its about adhering to the electrical craft principles we were all taught.
My tutors would be have a fit if they heard some of the comments going on here.
Practically IMO its not good for a circuit to be running over its CCC even if it only for a few seconds with big loads being plugged in untill its goes pop.
Then you could argue that being plunged in total darkness could warrant a C2 for safety reasons in some certain circumstances.
It would be a C3 for me all day long. We dont mix power with lighting circuits.

Yes we do, we commonly have smoke alarms on lighting circuits.