Am I Right Or Wrong

[SKY]

Hi All

Brother in law just moved into a council owned starter flat - small-ish with 1 bedroom.

The kitchen is on a separate ring main as are the lights and the outside lighting.

The socket circuit feeds ONLY 4 double outlets (2 in BR and 2 in LR) by looking at the CU it appears to be wired as a ring final with a feed out and feed return protected by a 32a RCBO using 2.5mm T+E.

Now I took off ALL the 4 face plates that make up the circuit and there is only 1 line 1 N and 1 CPC so it really appears that there must be a ring main to an unknown JB and tails supplying the socket outlets.

I have said to my Brother In Law that the 32a protective device is to big to be able to offer over current protection to the single tails, he called the council electrician to tell him my findings who visited the property today and said that yes there is a ring main under the floor and that the 32a protective device is OK.

As you would guess I'm saying to him this is incorrect and the council sparks is saying its OK - Who is right??
As you would imagine the council sparks has left in the 32a RCBO.




** there is no visible signs of fused spurs or accessible JBs that I can find**
**The cable run is run in part plastic trunk (grouped) then direct clipped to joists then in the wall up to the outlet**

I would be happy for a 16a protective device or a 20a max.

 

[malcolmsanford]

I'm going to throw a different light on this now as this is an old way of wiring a ring in several properties I have seen over the years. The ring as the 4 socket outlets,all with just the a single L N E. Often what was done and I never really found out why, was the ring was ran into JB's and a single supply taken to the socket, so in this case you may have a ring under the boards, with 4 junction boxes which then feeds 4 spurred socket, one for each JB point, so in theory one spur off each point which is allowed. Now if the JB are unaccessible then you could say they are contravening the regs, but when was this installation done?

 

[Jimmyb]

jb needs replacing, what if there maintance free then there ok, i dont agree at all with what they have done but the cable going to the socket cant be overloaded as the max the socket can draw in my way of seeing it is 26a and 2.5mm is rated @ 27 amps so ok, also for some reason the regs only class a double socket as rated at 13amp so again no overload problems, if it was me a would put a 20 rcbo on it because i just never have agreed with the 'it cant be overloaded rule unless its in a cooker cables'

 

[davelerave]

i wouldn't depend on the double socket limiting the load on the 2.5 really -in the domestic environment the diyer may add more later

no such worries over here(roi) as unfused spurs were banned in the latest rules


everything goes on the ring -keeps it simple

 

[ezzzekiel]

been working council contacts for a couple years now, didnt realise that made me rubbish

 

[mickys86]

been working council contacts for a couple years now, didnt realise that made me rubbish

I guess it's a majority giving the rest a bad name

 

[Des 56]

The way i see it with council jobs,the tendering is very cut throat and the firms that get the contracts then sub the work out, at lower rates than an installation deserves labour wise
The electrician is damned if he does and skint if he doesn't

I would expect anyones standards to take a hit if the prices are too tight to allow the time needed

What do they do,go without work and let someone else take their job ? or do the best in the circumstances
I dont think its a case of council wiring sparks being less capable than any others.its the structure of the tendering and the "greater than should be expected" labour intensity thats at fault

As for the original post ( which I almost forgot about) sorry

It was common practice,as Malcolm said, many installations were wired to a Jb then a single cable out from the Jb
Maybe they dug up a really old timer to do the high intensity work and re buried him along with his lack of common sense