You're all cowboys! :D

[Guest123]

A.

Haven't the time nor the inclination to argue the ---- with morons like that!

 

[brightspark2010]

I am lost it I was under the impression it does not mater what containment the cable is run in. It is a socket outlet deemed for general use and needs to be 30mA protected the fact its not in a metallic partition wall or less than 50mm deep is irrelevant isnt it????

 

[Paul.M]

I am lost it I was under the impression it does not mater what containment the cable is run in. It is a socket outlet deemed for general use and needs to be 30mA protected the fact its not in a metallic partition wall or less than 50mm deep is irrelevant isnt it????

No.......

 

[Guest111]

leave well alone,I may be wrong but I thought that the last person to work on an install is accountable if something goes wrong on the basis that you knew there were issues with install so shouldn,t have touched it in the first place.

 

[Paul.M]

But there's no bonding there !!

I must admit that I didn't see the part in the op about no bonding when I replied last night. Me answer would be A in that case.

With bonding me answer D stands to the regs and not the urban myths that the NIC have imposed on our brains that anything we touch needs to be on an rcd. Not correct going by the regs but on the other hand it would be safer, your call as the professional electrician.

 

[highspark]

Just been to another Consumer Unit job-quote. Told him bonding needs upgrading. "OH THE OTHER FELLA DIDN'T MENTION THAT" I was 20 quid more expensive with bonding to gas and water. Hes got another lad coming out tomorrow, hope hes worth his salt and mentions the bonding but is more expensive than me. If he doesn't theres another one to the cowboys!

 

[Matty o]

Sorry missed the bonding part
but my reply still stands i would try and persuade them to have it done but if they refuse i feel i have have done my part and happy that i am not leaving the house in any worse state than when i arrived.
i would note it on the MW that they would not have it done.

 

[richy3333]

Sorry missed the bonding part
but my reply still stands i would try and persuade them to have it done but if they refuse i feel i have have done my part and happy that i am not leaving the house in any worse state than when i arrived.
i would note it on the MW that they would not have it done.

Really?? And your view on Reg 132.16 is...

 

[Matty o]

Not got the book with me for the exact wording but by fitting the rcd socket is the bonding such a issue.

It is a hard one but in some ways i would rather to do it than say no and then they go and do it themselves after all its made no difference to their lack of safety if anything you have made it safer by them having a socket where they want instead of a lead across the floor.

Taking it further does this mean you would not change a broken socket front as the bonding is not up to latest standard.

 

[richy3333]

Not got the book with me for the exact wording but by fitting the rcd socket is the bonding such a issue.

It is a hard one but in some ways i would rather to do it than say no and then they go and do it themselves after all its made no difference to their lack of safety if anything you have made it safer by them having a socket where they want instead of a lead across the floor.

Taking it further does this mean you would not change a broken socket front as the bonding is not up to latest standard.

Blinding! Well I'm glad you aren't doing my electrical work mate and to be fair it is a Reg you should really know. Basically, no addition or alteration either temporary or permanent should be done to an existing installation unless the earthing and bonding arrangements are adequate (I've paraphrased).

If you're a Spark you work to the Regs, or better. What Mr and Mrs householder or DIY Dave does is up to them but you're supposed to be a professional?

Do you really believe what you're saying/writing?!

 

[pencilpusher]

Not got the book with me for the exact wording but by fitting the rcd socket is the bonding such a issue.

It is a hard one but in some ways i would rather to do it than say no and then they go and do it themselves after all its made no difference to their lack of safety if anything you have made it safer by them having a socket where they want instead of a lead across the floor.

Taking it further does this mean you would not change a broken socket front as the bonding is not up to latest standard.

Matty o , You cannot be that desperate for £40.00? That is against the Regs, period.

 

[Andy 7671]

I with option D

You are not providing a new circuit just add a point to an existing one.
The cable is surface mounted.
If the socket might be used to power equipment outdoors i would fit a RCD socket

Lecturer..."Any socket that may reasonably be expected to supply portable equipment outside the equipotential zone must have a disconnection time of .2 secs" I couldnt find it, only anything 32A and above was mentioned with this time value.

 

[Big n Daft]

Its an easy one really.......

If the bondings ok and its not in a special location and not going to be used for outdoor equipment and........, run it mt with no rcd.

If the bondings not ok, this has to be done before anything else can even be thought of, period.

In reality, its a minimum of bonding done and an rcd spur.

Simples:coffee:

 

[grimysparks80]

Personally I think you should be allowed to do the job having advised the customer of the other things that need to be done and on the basis that you are not making the house any less safe.

If the regs said i could do the work and leave the bonding as long as i advised them of it I would do so without a moments hesitation, and would not feel any guilt if they were hurt because they ignored my advice.

However the Regs do not say this so the answer has to be A.

Whats the point of having Regs if you just ignore them when they are inconvenient?

 

[Octopus]

Whats the point of having Regs if you just ignore them when they are inconvenient?

Whats the point of the regs if NO attempt is made to educate the public!

We're the mugs who have to tell people that they need work done, which they believe is unnecessary, and costly.

 

[Heisenberg]

With bonding me answer D stands to the regs and not the urban myths that the NIC have imposed on our brains that anything we touch needs to be on an rcd.

Whilst I'm always happy to see people put the boot into the NIC :60: , I don't think they are alone in taking that stance...

Alterations and additions in domestic and similar premises : Electrical Safety Council

Q1 and Q3

 

[Des 56]

The problem that will always be in this industry,is installers can be educated in whats required and their hands are then tied by being aware
Other installers have no idea of whats required,they install away till the cows come home

Installation,even with this part prat thing,is to all extents and purposes an open field to all to have a go

We,unfortunately have to follow what is advised
We stand idly by whilst the ignorant are permitted, and given the green light, to do what they think or couldn't care should be done

It can never change,because these practices are only important in our eyes,electricity is not the extensive lethal killer we may all assume

Installation can never be monitored.however,inspection can provide improvement

We, however, are pressured by it all to either have to lose work or sometimes drop the standards to get a look in
As it stands its a no win situation that aint gonna change soon

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Honestly?....probably C ......I would add that the install does not meet current standards,but that adding this socket will not in any way reduce the present safety of the installation. I would NOT undertake any more extensive work than the described...but bonding aside,prior to 2008 the install you describe would have complied anyway..(just 4 years ago!)

Not got the book with me for the exact wording but by fitting the rcd socket is the bonding such a issue.

It is a hard one but in some ways i would rather to do it than say no and then they go and do it themselves after all its made no difference to their lack of safety if anything you have made it safer by them having a socket where they want instead of a lead across the floor.

Taking it further does this mean you would not change a broken socket front as the bonding is not up to latest standard.

Blinding! Well I'm glad you aren't doing my electrical work mate and to be fair it is a Reg you should really know. Basically, no addition or alteration either temporary or permanent should be done to an existing installation unless the earthing and bonding arrangements are adequate (I've paraphrased).

If you're a Spark you work to the Regs, or better. What Mr and Mrs householder or DIY Dave does is up to them but you're supposed to be a professional?

Do you really believe what you're saying/writing?!

I think there is more to consider here than is first apparent. If the client could well afford to have their install upgraded then I would walk away. If the client was an OAP,who could not afford to upgrade,and needed an extra socket...and in my opinion based on 30yrs in the game(most of it as a full NIC approved)...adding one socket not on an RCD and with no bonding would not reduce the current safety of the install,then yes....I may well do it as a cash job with no cert....I dont think that is necessarily unprofessional,especially when the said install has been in perfectly satisfactory use for 30 or 40 years,and probably will be for another 20 or 30.
It is possible to assess the risk from lack of bonding you know....what is the risk of simultaneous contact between CP's and ECP's in relation to the whole install and the minor addition?....assess and decide whether or not to proceed.....some might say that simply walking away is unprofessional.

 

[Matty o]

WHS

We are talking about the lack of bonding NOT the lack of a main earth.

The problem with the regs is that ask 10 sparks about it and you will get 15 answers this is where proper training comes in and the ability to interpret them and assess the risks.

 

[needasparks]

I think there is more to consider here than is first apparent. If the client could well afford to have their install upgraded then I would walk away. If the client was an OAP,who could not afford to upgrade,and needed an extra socket...and in my opinion based on 30yrs in the game(most of it as a full NIC approved)...adding one socket not on an RCD and with no bonding would not reduce the current safety of the install,then yes....I may well do it as a cash job with no cert....I dont think that is necessarily unprofessional,especially when the said install has been in perfectly satisfactory use for 30 or 40 years,and probably will be for another 20 or 30.
It is possible to assess the risk from lack of bonding you know....what is the risk of simultaneous contact between CP's and ECP's in relation to the whole install and the minor addition?....assess and decide whether or not to proceed.....some might say that simply walking away is unprofessional.

Interesting take and my heart has to agree but as matty says you will not get the same responce from any two sparks.
Shame really as that is how it always used to be, professionals making an educated guess. now and what the whole thread is about is making it harder to do the right thing.

 

[Paul.M]

Option E:- Buy him/her a 1 meter double socket extention lead for a fiver. Not fixed wiring, nothing to do with the regs and customer gets what he wants, simples.

 

[ackbarthestar]

It is possible to assess the risk from lack of bonding you know....what is the risk of simultaneous contact between CP's and ECP's in relation to the whole install and the minor addition?....assess and decide whether or not to proceed.....some might say that simply walking away is unprofessional.

Others might say: You will leave yourself wide open to, best case, ridicule and worst case, prosecution. OAPs notwithstanding.

Experience tells us a lot of things but doesn't prepare us for the unpredictable event.

 

[brightspark2010]

Had a quick read of the regs quoted paul is this to be interpreted that if it is i) a 16/20amp circuit the sockets require 30ma protection however if its ii) a 32A ring/radial the 30ma protection is only required for outdoors as in 16th

 

[nickblake]

Me i would go for other option yes i know its not there his board is old there is no bonding , a socket which could be used for outside has to be RCD protected ,which basically means any socket in the house ive see extensions run from the 3rd floor window to out side and look at all the outside exmas lights , me i would say you have to install bonding you have to have the RCD and a cert will be issued etc , if i dont get the job and mr DIY comes and does it then fine ,and if it all goes wrong it wont be me in court !!

 

[richy3333]

WHS

We are talking about the lack of bonding NOT the lack of a main earth.

The problem with the regs is that ask 10 sparks about it and you will get 15 answers this is where proper training comes in and the ability to interpret them and assess the risks.

No doubt you've now had time to look at the Regs book It clearly refers to bonding so I don't understand where the confusion is. 132.16 Clearly says that the earthing and BONDING shall be adequate. Why would that generate 15 different answers?

 

[Guest123]

Had a quick read of the regs quoted paul is this to be interpreted that if it is i) a 16/20amp circuit the sockets require 30ma protection however if its ii) a 32A ring/radial the 30ma protection is only required for outdoors as in 16th

No, it's the actual rating of the socket outlet that is referred to here, i.e, a standard BS 1363 socket outlet is rated at 13A and therefore falls under the 411.3.3 (i) regulation.

 

[Matty o]

To be honest i couldn't be bothered as it think we are going to have to disagree, although i do agree that you are right in a ideal world

As to the generating answers we are on post 66 and still not got a straight definitive answer.

Referring to a early question i posed
Does this mean you would refuse to replace a broken socket front in this house.

 

[D Skelton]

I think there is more to consider here than is first apparent. If the client could well afford to have their install upgraded then I would walk away. If the client was an OAP,who could not afford to upgrade,and needed an extra socket...and in my opinion based on 30yrs in the game(most of it as a full NIC approved)...adding one socket not on an RCD and with no bonding would not reduce the current safety of the install,then yes....I may well do it as a cash job with no cert....I dont think that is necessarily unprofessional,especially when the said install has been in perfectly satisfactory use for 30 or 40 years,and probably will be for another 20 or 30.
It is possible to assess the risk from lack of bonding you know....what is the risk of simultaneous contact between CP's and ECP's in relation to the whole install and the minor addition?....assess and decide whether or not to proceed.....some might say that simply walking away is unprofessional.

Couldn't have put it better myself!

Ok Mr Skelton what did you do? I guess you were professional and walked away.

I have done both A and C, funnily enough for the exact reasons outlined above in wirepullers post and I have no shame or guilt in admitting that.

And I've never done B as I would never put my name to something that is technically wrong, and a little bit naughty.

 

[D Skelton]

Does this mean you would refuse to replace a broken socket front in this house.

Like for like changes are permitted no matter what the current state of the installation is

 

[Matty o]

I know
It highlights another problem with the regs, changing a socket front or spurring a new surface mounted socket 1m next to it it treated so differently but in reality is the same outcome.

Major work like adding a new circuit i agree is diffrent.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

I know
It highlights another problem with the regs, changing a socket front or spurring a new surface mounted socket 1m next to it it treated so differently but in reality is the same outcome.

Major work like adding a new circuit i agree is diffrent.

This is where grey areas creep in....like for like...a broken single for a new single....is changing that broken single for a twin different?....would you not need to upgrade the bonding/RCD if it stays as a single...but would need to upgrade it if it became a twin?...(the same kind of lunacy as an RCD FCU for one extra socket in a bedroom with no other RCD in the house)....there seems now to be a blind adherence to the 'regs' because of a fear of ending up in court...when there was a time when a professional electrician could make a judgement on departures from the 'regs'......be bloody glad when I'm out of it.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

The problem with this thread, is that there appears to be quite a bit of misinformation and mis-quotation of the Regulations.
For instance, 131.8/132.16 does not state the earthing and bonding must be adequate, it states "the earthing and bonding arrangements, if neccessary for the protective measure applied for the safety of the addition or alteration, shall be adequate."
Being adequate, does not neccessarily equate to compliance with the Regulations.
In this particular case, the protective measure applied will be ADS, and if the socket-outlet is intended for general use by an ordinary person, or to supply mobile equipment outdoors, there shall be aditional protection by use of a 30mA RCD.
Bonding is not neccessary in order for either of these protective measures to operate.
As such, unless there are two or more extraneous-conductive-parts that can be simultaneously touched, it can be argued that the installation of Main Protective Bonding is not required.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Good point Spin.....although I guess the 'what if you are taken to court' school of thought would argue that a CP from the socket could be taken within reach of an ECP by means of an extension lead..!

 

[Matty o]

This is my point the regs are not law and do not cover every situation and they should come with a highly trained professionally to interpret them and assesses the risks of each job.

And last week i broke the speed limit in the van and once on a night out i had a **** behind the jobcentre

 

[Heisenberg]

For those of you with a website, having a link to this and requesting that all potential customers read it, might just help should any issues relating to this become apparent further down the line.

http://www.esc.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/public/leaflets/E_B2011webA4screen.pdf

At the very least it will make the customer aware that it is not just something you have dreamed up, to enable you to gouge them of their hard earned moolah.

We often talk about the government not doing enough to educate the public, so instead of moaning about it we should be doing all we can to educate our own customers.

You know it makes sense, Rodney :greedy:

 

[Dan]

Just bumping some threads in the Electrical Wiring Theories and Regulations forum category here on our Electricians Forums. If this specific topic isn't current, just ignore it, it'll drop off the list in no time. However, if it's something you'd like to contribute to, feel free to reply and bring it back into current discussion.