Advice On Rewire Of Lighting Circuit

[Master Mech]

I have just had some work carried our to rewire a lighting circuit in my house due to it having no earthing.

The lighting circuit is the original lighting circuit that was installed when the house was built in the 50's which was ran in steel conduit.

We now want to fit metal accessories but obviously require earthing for this to be safe so a rewire of this circuit is required & to be honest has been way overdue for replacement anyway.

Like most people I did not fancy chasing all the walls out to install new cables so asked the electrician if the steel conduit already plastered into the walls could be used saving the need to chase the walls out & redecoration.

He said that would not be an issue after looking over the installation as there would be enough room for the new cabling to be fed down the old conduit which was great news.

When he came to install the new cabling here found that he could not install the twin & earth cabling with the sheath attached as there was not enough room inside the conduit.

His solution was to strip the sheath from the twin & earth cabling and then wrap all the individual wires together in electrical insulation tape.

Removing the sheath created the room required to be able to feed the cables down the existing conduit.

Where the conduit ends in the loft space he left the sheath on the cables & the ran them to a junction box.

Here are some pictures of the junction box in the loft space & the tops of where the conduit for the switch drops end.

The same lighting circuit also covers not only the upstairs bedrooms but the landing, hallway & dining room lighting so cables needed to be ran under the landing floor boards & junction boxes installed.

Here are some pictures of the junction boxes under the landing floorboards.

So my question is are there any issues with how this work has been carried out?

I am probably making a mountain out of a mole hill but I would really appreciate your input.

Many thanks

Adam

 

[Pete999]

It is easy to say it is non compliant but no one is coming up with what they would say in say an EICR. What is the non compliance? I am not saying it is good or acceptable practice or compliant just thinking it through properly. I have a ricked back so stuck at home and taking it out on here.

So what is your point?

 

[Wilko]

It is easy to say it is non compliant but no one is coming up with what they would say in say an EICR. What is the non compliance? I am not saying it is good or acceptable practice or compliant just thinking it through properly. I have a ricked back so stuck at home and taking it out on here.

If I was round for a Report I expect I wouldn’t be able to see those JB and the circuits would test ok due to Wago .

 

[Pete999]

I suppose the non maintenance free boxes under the floor boards would get a C3, though far from a big deal. The patress could be a C1 if the hole is big enough to get a finger in, otherwise no code. 1950s, I assume that conduit was the clamp together stuff so likely isn't earthed. C3 if the conduit is not accessible to touch, C2 if it is.

Never mind the JBs what about the idiot idea of stuffing stripped off singles down some conduit?

 

[Pretty Mouth]

Never mind the JBs what about the idiot idea of stuffing stripped off singles down some conduit?

If the conduit was earthed, I would see little problem with that, other than the sharp edge at the point the cable exits at the top

 

[Vortigern]

So what is your point?

My "point" @Pete999 is WHAT IS NON COMPLIANT

 

[James]

132.7 type of wiring and method of instalation
133.1.1 and 133.1.3 Selection of electrical equipment
134.1.1 good workmanship
510.3 compliance with instructions
511 compliance with standards
522.8.1 cable supports and enclosures

hows that for starters?

 

[Vortigern]

132.7 type of wiring and method of instalation

Not relevant

133.1.1 and 133.1.3 Selection of electrical equipment

Not relevant as you can operate outside of British or Harmonised standard where certification is provided to show it is at least as safe.
it refers to electrical equipment not cable

134.1.1 good workmanship

Maybe true

510.3 compliance with instructions

What instructions?

511 compliance with standards

We have seen standards but cannot view them, only the numbers so cannot comment (or afford them)

522.8.1 cable supports and enclosures

I cannot really see damage occurring so I think irrelevant and looking at the next reg you could just as easily say it agrees it is an acceptable method.

hows that for starters?

 

[Vortigern]

I know we see things which we are intuitively disgusted at or detest, but that is not something you can write on a cert. C2 cable is disgusting - is just plain nonsense. My whole point being it may be bad practice, it may look bad but really speaking how does it seriously cause danger to livestock of person. As I say I have nothing better to do, not really agreeing or defending such sloppy work but I like to be clear when I say that is a problem to a client and be able to quote a reg that actually makes unequivocal sense, not just have an emotional outburst, it's just not professional and is an offence to reason. I just feel it's like those cowboys who with a sharp intake of breath, "no earth you'll have to have a rewire","no rcd, you'll have to have a new cu madam"

 

[Pete999]

My "point" @Pete999 is WHAT IS NON COMPLIANT

Most of the installation

 

[James]

I am not arguing with you here, @Vortigern .
i suspect it would not be your choice of instalation method.
i am trying to put some actual reg numbers into the conversation to debate.

 

[westward10]

A non compliance does not necessarily pose a risk to life or health. Because unsheathed conductors have been installed and the conduit is open ended the containment system is incomplete. The two gang back box is essentially broken and cable ties are not appropriate for ad hoc cable restraint.
I don't believe anyone would go home, put their feet up and think yep I did a good job there.

 

[Vortigern]

I am debating personally. No hint of argument. I think 134 good workmanship is the only reg I can see that may be relevant and I have had a look at them all to see if there is merit and I think it is on the edge for a of what you introduce. I have no doubt I could put them all into a report and rely on the fact no one would really check them and assume there has been an egregious failure of the installation and compliance which would not really be the case.

 

[James]

James said:
132.7 type of wiring and method of instalation

Not relevant

The choice of the type of wiring system and the method of instalation shall include consideration of the following

i The nature of the location (probably nor relevant)
ii The nature of the structure supporting the wiring (hmm, single insulation entering a sharp conduit) maybe

iii to vi not relevant

vii other external influences (e.g. mechanical, thermal, and those associated with fire) to which the wiring is likley to be exposed to during the erection of the electrical instalation or service.

 

[Vortigern]

Most of the installation

'fank gawd you don't work for NICEIC

 

[Vortigern]

other external influences (e.g. mechanical,

Yes I could actually see that one. If someone put a heavy item to store up there and plonked it on that wire, or tripped/stood on it, there could certainly be a big bang so definitely concede the point there, and it is quite likely as a possible event. If it was earthed though....