C/H supply - spurred or dedicated cct?

[Carter]

I wasn't being funny, but sometimes we get a bee in our bonnet about someone or something and our minds blow it out of all proportion, it takes over our logic.

Oh I'm aware of that mate, but in this instance (and over four hundred others don't forget) someone has dropped the ball or taken the **** for the sake of an easy life and to someone else's detriment. Oh and all using public money as well.

...you're probably the only one getting stressed about it,

'Fraid not Giio, following several telephone conversations with their Clerk of Works who rather shame-facedly revealed he was from a plumbing background but "I've got me Part P and I can put the NICEIC logo on my van!"
I told him to refer it up to his electrical specifying engineer and come back to me with a definitive answer. It seems I've set a rabbit loose as I've had no response to the question other than an offer by return to install a dedicated circuit as requested (hmmmm) and would I be willing to receive a site visit from him and said engineer to discuss the issue in detail?

Well of course says I, no problem with that, but why do I need a visit from your engineer? Does it comply or not? Simple enough question isn't it? So it seems they admit there's an issue to address here as; margins on Hsg. Assoc. maintenance contracts being what they are, I expected a flat refusal to entertain any remedial work. Now if they think there is a problem with this one of sufficient magnitude to wipe out their profit on the job then the implications are very far reaching indeed. What's the betting that it's been reproduced parrot fashion across the country's Hsg. Assocs.?

Should be an interesting meeting. Smoke me a kipper!

 

[malcolmsanford]

Lol .....................love this wish, I was that engineer in question.

So now this company is going to have to risk assess every installation they do regarding a CH boiler installation.

Ok number 27 is an 80 yr old woman so 314.2 invoked .........seperate boiler circuit

Ok number 29 young family with a bay .....hmmmmm yes go on then invoke 314.2 seperate boiler circuit

Ok number 31 couple of young lads .......oh they are ok spur the boiler

Ok number 33 75 yr old woman but has a 44 yr old son living with her .............hmmmm no they will be ok spur the boiler circuit

hold on chief number 29 have moved out and a family with no children have moved in ............ok then un-invoke that 314.2 as they are Ok spur now for the boiler circuit

all the above is nonsense ......................

 

[Carter]

Lol .....................love this wish, I was that engineer in question.

So now this company is going to have to risk assess every installation they do regarding a CH boiler installation.

Ok number 27 is an 80 yr old woman so 314.2 invoked .........seperate boiler circuit

Ok number 29 young family with a bay .....hmmmmm yes go on then invoke 314.2 seperate boiler circuit

Ok number 31 couple of young lads .......oh they are ok spur the boiler

Ok number 33 75 yr old woman but has a 44 yr old son living with her .............hmmmm no they will be ok spur the boiler circuit

hold on chief number 29 have moved out and a family with no children have moved in ............ok then un-invoke that 314.2 as they are Ok spur now for the boiler circuit

Or they could have just done the right thing in the first place and kept the seperate feed, lot easier. The regs can neither be 'invoked' any more than they can be ignored, they are what they are.

all the above is nonsense ......................

We'll have to wait and see. Moreover, why would they immediately come back with an offer to install a seperate circuit without so much as a quibble if they didn't think they were on shakey ground?

 

[coomers]

just had to have my say there is absolutley nothing wrong with spuring off ring for a ch boiler,fan heater,security light and a number of other items, yes good idea to put all of the above on dedicated circuits but no reg says we need to.if we carried out rewire. new build we would all try (i hope) to pull a lot more circuits 3 maybe 4 rings 3 or 4 lighting etc. are you saying ring has more chance of a fault than a ch boiler circuit. if the company in question issued a minor works certificate call there conforming body ie nic ,nappit etc and they WILL agree with me (30 yrs exp. and nic approved 18 years and many boilers spured) p.s. company in question carried out 400 jobs like this if they went back to cu on all these cost goes up less jobs and maybe poor old carters auntie no new boiler.

 

[mark80]

My god i cant believe this discussion has gone on for this long! There is nothing wrong with what has been done! Yes it may not be best practice, personally i would not do it, but is it really that dangerous? At the end of the day as long as the boiler is fused down correctly and it is clearly marked up at the DB its fine. If its bothering you that much why dont you get onto this housing associations scheme provider and tell them of all the wrong theyre doing and see what they say?
Other examples, people spur off socket circuits to feed maybe a garden light or two and to be honest it wouldnt be my first choice of how to do the job, but aslong as its fused down etc, then its complies. As you will know yourself, cost is a massive part for the customer and we cant always do a job to our own personal standards as it may involve extra cost. Housing associations arent immune to this extra cost either. I just think theres bigger problems in the world then that someone has spurred for the boiler from the RFC.