16th ed unsheathed cables

[Pelly1]

Thanks for replies .i think spinlondon got jist,if I didn’t comply with 16th at time of completion and signing off of test sheets then client going after builder to put things right.wouldnt have same firm in test sheets were a joke ,written out in cafe /pub me thinks

 

[I2C]

I think you are missing the point.
The wiring is not satisfactory, and the OP wishes to know if it complied with the Regulations in force at the time of it’s design/construction.
If it did comply, the OP’s client may not be able to ask the builder to rectify under the terms of the warranty.
If it did not comply then the client will be able to ask the builder to rectify.
What you personally would do is neither here nor there.
All the OP needs to know, is whether the work complied.

I see what you mean, sorry for the confusion.
As Spinlondon said, if it wasn't satisfactory when installed then the warranty should take care of it.

 

[davesparks]

Previous work carried-out which was compliant under old regulations is deemed satisfactory by current regulations,

Which particular regulation would you use to support this statement?

 

[Octopus]

Such work practices are going on today ....

 

[westward10]

Not very often we see your work Murdoch

 

[I2C]

Which particular regulation would you use to support this statement?

Page 4 of the current regulations (BS7671 Amendent 3) states under the title "Introduction to BS 7671:2008(2015)" during paragraph two, that "Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the Regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading"

 

[westward10]

Page 4 of the current regulations (BS7671 Amendent 3) states under the title "Introduction to BS 7671:2008(2015)" during paragraph two, that "Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the Regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading"

That isn't quite what you quoted in #13.

 

[I2C]

That isn't quite what you quoted in #13.

I was paraphrasing, and I accept I wasn't completely correct during #13 but neither was I quoting. I hope this clears things up.

The regulations could be more specific regarding your question and at the end of the day, it's entirely your choice when interpenetrating it's contents. To be honest, you don't even need to follow it's advice at all technically, but I'm not getting into that as it's not something I'd recommend.

 

[davesparks]

Page 4 of the current regulations (BS7671 Amendent 3) states under the title "Introduction to BS 7671:2008(2015)" during paragraph two, that "Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the Regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading"

That does not support your statement. As you have clearly highlighted it only states that it does not necessarily mean that it is unsafe or requires upgrading, this is not the same as saying that something installed compliance with previous regulations is never dangerous or needs upgrading.

What it means is that compliance with previous regulations on its own is not a reason to consider something unsafe, a good example is that red and black conductors do not comply with current regulations but this on its own is not unsafe.
It also means that if something is considered unsafe now then it doesn’t matter if it complied at the time of installation, it is unsafe. A good example of this is that it was once a requirement of the regulations to install a fuse in the neutral of a circuit, this is now considered unsafe and is potentially dangerous.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Which edition of the Regulations required fused neutrals?

 

[davesparks]

Which edition of the Regulations required fused neutrals?

The 9th edition (regulation 94) is the only one I actually have a copy of to hand to confirm this at the moment, but I think the requirement was also in later editions and wasn’t removed until the 13th (1950’s era)

 

[Toneyz]

I am sure that in the 15th you could have unsheathed flex to loads eg electric clocks lights etc of 0.5A. It would not be the edition of the regs it was installed more as designed to. when was this work done ?. The problem is that these fittings are mostly designed to take one cable, however, this is just bad workmanship.

 

[Wilko]

View attachment 39378 Such work practices are going on today ....

You been in my kitchen ?
(Kev definitely helped with the under cupboard lights)

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I would imagine the installation was constructed within the last 10 years, considering the client wishes to take advantage of the 10 year warranty.

 

[KEV 1 N]

You been in my kitchen ?
(Kev definitely helped with the under cupboard lights)

Steady!.....I would never use green/yellow tape for that........black tape would blend in better!