Absolutely no earth for lighting circuit.

[spark 68]

i cannot find a reg that dictates the practice of splitting up circuits as to minimise inconvienience

531.2.4 (bgb) is another related to RCD's

 

[Deleted member 26818]

If you do follow the ESC's advice given in their BPG, remember to note it down as a departure on the EIC.

 

[bigbadal13]

Sorry to top up an old post but I've just had a similar situation where I've changed a CU for someone as it was an old metal one with re-wirable fuses, the cover was missing and there were none of the barriers inside! There was also no cpc to the lighting just single black and reds. I've explained to the lady that she either needs to have the lighting rewired or change the light fittings to class 2. She is going to have the light fittings changed, I'm going to put it all strongly in writing with the certificate but where do we stand if she'd have refused? surely it's better that by fitting a new board with rcd protection we've made the situation safer?

 

[41steve]

U should have noticed or checked b4 u took the job on. Also the bonding clamp is not allowed!!!

 

[41steve]

No cus u shouldnt have messed with the installation knowing that. also is the bonding in place?

 

[bigbadal13]

Yep the bonding is all ok

 

[41steve]

The conduit needs 2b earthed anyway and not with an earth clamp.

 

[Des 56]

Sorry to top up an old post but I've just had a similar situation where I've changed a CU for someone as it was an old metal one with re-wirable fuses, the cover was missing and there were none of the barriers inside! There was also no cpc to the lighting just single black and reds. I've explained to the lady that she either needs to have the lighting rewired or change the light fittings to class 2. She is going to have the light fittings changed, I'm going to put it all strongly in writing with the certificate but where do we stand if she'd have refused? surely it's better that by fitting a new board with rcd protection we've made the situation safer?

If the metal clad board was part of a full conduit installation,perhaps the installation is now less safe ( was it full conduit ?)
Reliance may now be on an rcd on a circuit with no earth,whereas previously the circuit may have had adequate protection via the conduit and the rewireable fuse

I am inquisitive to ask
quote
I've changed a CU for someone as it was an old metal one with re-wirable fuses,

Was this the main or sole reason for making this decision ?

 

[41steve]

Wrong!

 

[41steve]

An NIC engineer once told me dont think u r making an installation safer cus of a board change. It was cus of the disconnection times and the current needed 2 trip an RCD. Makes ya think.

 

[K Macnamara]

So long as you make the landlord aware of your concerns, note them on your cert and class it as a C1 with an unsatisfactory overall opinion, it's not your problem and no longer your responsibility. Provide him with the options to rectify the issue, the easiest being making the circuit a class II, the most beneficial would be to install a cpc. Advise that it would be wise to add a condition to the rental agreement that tenants are not permitted to alter the accessory's to the circuit where a cpc is not provided.

I would be interested to know what the outcome is when you inform them that once in possession of your advice it is their responsibility.

 

[Octopus]

So long as you make the landlord aware of your concerns, note them on your cert and class it as a C1 with an unsatisfactory overall opinion, it's not your problem and no longer your responsibility. Provide him with the options to rectify the issue, the easiest being making the circuit a class II, the most beneficial would be to install a cpc. Advise that it would be wise to add a condition to the rental agreement that tenants are not permitted to alter the accessory's to the circuit where a cpc is not provided.

I would be interested to know what the outcome is when you inform them that once in possession of your advice it is their responsibility.

matey. This thread is neatly 4 years old!

 

[davesparks]

So long as you make the landlord aware of your concerns, note them on your cert and class it as a C1 with an unsatisfactory overall opinion, it's not your problem and no longer your responsibility. Provide him with the options to rectify the issue, the easiest being making the circuit a class II, the most beneficial would be to install a cpc. Advise that it would be wise to add a condition to the rental agreement that tenants are not permitted to alter the accessory's to the circuit where a cpc is not provided.

I would be interested to know what the outcome is when you inform them that once in possession of your advice it is their responsibility.

This thread is from 2012 so I think it's more a case of what the outcome was rather than what it will be!

But in response to your post:
Recording a C1 observation on an EIC is not acceptable.
It is his problem because he fitted a new CU to the installation and re-energised it in full knowledge that the circuit was in a potentially dangerous condition.
You cannot make singles in steel conduit into a double insulated installation without replacing with double insulated singles.

 

[Risteard]

You cannot make singles in steel conduit into a double insulated installation without replacing with double insulated singles.

What are double-insulated singles? In fact, what is a double-insulated cable?

Nonetheless, an installation with a protective measure of double or reinforced insulation is highly specialist and would not be found in any domestic premises!

 

[davesparks]

What are double-insulated singles? In fact, what is a double-insulated cable?

Nonetheless, an installation with a protective measure of double or reinforced insulation is highly specialist and would not be found in any domestic premises!

Double insulated singles would be single core cables with double insulation don't ask me where to buy them though as I've never yet come across any.

That is my point.