UK Cowboy electrician

[Bob Geldoff1234]

This was installed by an "electrician" 4 months ago.Single RCD feeding 5 breakers for a two bedroom,two story house.
The lady was charged £675 for this crap and was told she'd get a certificate,which no matter how much she rings them up,doesn't seem to be forth coming.I wonder why?
It really makes my blood boil when I see stuff like this and they even get away with charging over the odds for it.

 

[telectrix]

I resemble that remark. ?

i.m sure you know what i mean. some call centre bods don't know their arse from their elbow. i think you, yourself, know more than that.

 

[KennyKen]

I got nothing against anyone bettering themselves and in the past I have been very critical of the short course route, although you are correct. It depends on the individual. I have in the past come across the blokes who have completed the block intensive courses and then call themselves “Electricians”. That is annoying.

 

[Grant1987]

I got nothing against anyone bettering themselves and in the past I have been very critical of the short course route, although you are correct. It depends on the individual. I have in the past come across the blokes who have completed the block intensive courses and then call themselves “Electricians”. That is annoying.

I’ve missed a lot on here since my banter with Dave and ipf, I don’t see a problem with either rcbos or dual rcd preferably I do dual based on cost and personal preference but can see the pros of rcbos. As for short course, full course, time served, part time served it’s all on your tutoring and training as sparkychick mentioned and It’s easy for us to judge other ppl on here without knowing them but worth remembering that you will never stop learning in this industry.

 

[Grant1987]

And I could infer that the average time served apprenticed spark is garbage compared to this particular short course spark if I was to show some of the garbage jobs I've seen that I know have been done by such people, or the shoddy new build installs done by supposedly reputable companies that make a big deal of churning out apprenticed sparks.

But it's not your route into the industry that will govern whether you produce rubbish work and/or follow the rules. It's your own personal work ethic and morals, which is why such statements are so annoying to those of us who went the short route (especially if we've gone on to undertake the same final qualifications as apprenticed sparks). We aren't all idiots, so it's been quite refreshing that this attitude hasn't been on display here for a while. Let's try and keep it that way.

I’ve only just realised sparky chick you are from South Wales? Where in South Wales are you based?

 

[SparkyChick]

I’ve only just realised sparky chick you are from South Wales? Where in South Wales are you based?

I'm based between Newport and Cardiff.

 

[telectrix]

me only been to Cardiff twice in my life. once to a Max Boyce concert, and once for a shag.

 

[richy3333]

Isn't that 1 visit then Tel'

 

[radiohead]

You state a preference for dual RCD boards which obviously meet current regulations (other than TT systems I believe), but why not recommend RCBO boards given that they are now available for little additional cost? Less chance of nuisance tripping for the customer and simpler fault finding, should problems occur in the future.

For clarification here a duel RCD board is fully compliant on a TT system.
But it is necessary to install RCD protection to the internal link wiring (usually of basic insulation) in a metal enclosure, normally by means of a time delayed 100ma or 300ma RCD main switch either inside or remote from the DB, where typical TT Ra values are recorded.
As many of us prefer a backup S type RCD main switch on a TT because of total reliance on RCD's for earth fault protection, there is no reason not to use a duel board if preferred.

 

[pc1966]

As many of us prefer a backup S type RCD main switch on a TT because of total reliance on RCD's for earth fault protection

I would definitely agree that having two coordinated RCD in series (a 100mA/300mA S-type 'delay' then dual-RCD/all-RCBO 30mA 'instant') ought to be the norm for TT to avoid a single point of failure for earth fault protection.

As for dual-RCD boards in general (i.e. in parallel to reduce fault impact) I can see both sides of the argument:

• They are usually cheaper, and not as bad as a single RCD board (so not total blackness if something trips the one RCD)
• But RCBO are not so expensive today compared to the skilled labour for a CU change

I certainly would always go down the RCBO route, but would not say a dual RCD board is in non-compliance with the regs.

 

[nicebutdim]

For clarification here a duel RCD board is fully compliant on a TT system.
But it is necessary to install RCD protection to the internal link wiring (usually of basic insulation) in a metal enclosure, normally by means of a time delayed 100ma or 300ma RCD main switch either inside or remote from the DB, where typical TT Ra values are recorded.
As many of us prefer a backup S type RCD main switch on a TT because of total reliance on RCD's for earth fault protection, there is no reason not to use a duel board if preferred.

I'd been uncertain of that at the time of posting, so thanks for pointing this out.

In my head was a section from 3.6.3.1 of the OSG, stating that a split load board was generally not suitable in a TT system, but in an earlier section this is covered with reference to the wiring regulations stating that an S type RCCB should be incorporated where a split load board is used.

I do remember this being discussed on another thread where some members expressed a preference for fitting an upfront RCCB, rather than relying on a main switch, and I liked that thinking as it afforded protection from loose tails as well as from busbar links in a split load board.
[automerge]1597519091[/automerge]

• But RCBO are not so expensive today compared to the skilled labour for a CU change

It was this point which set the discussion off in a bit of a spiral. The member in question had expressed a preference for split load boards 'every time' and I tried to ask why when RCBOs are now available at quite reasonable prices. I could see why a relatively small price difference may be too much for some customers, but felt that others might be happy to pay a little extra to minimise potential disruption.

 

[pc1966]

fitting an upfront RCCB, rather than relying on a main switch, and I liked that thinking as it afforded protection from loose tails as well as from busbar links in a split load board.

It is always the case that a RCD/RCCB/RCBO provides protection only for the downstream system.

Some folk have argues that in the TT case a non-metallic CU enclosure is safer as loose tails (or lack of entrance grommet), busbar going astray, etc, making contact with the case that are upstream of the incoming RCD do not make the system's CPC live. That may be true, but I suspect that of all the serious CU installation faults you might have a partial contact leading to a fire risk is a bit more likely!

But I still think no single point of failure (at least for things depending on electronics - my own background!) is a good goal for safety-critical systems.
[automerge]1597519566[/automerge]

It was this point which set the discussion off in a bit of a spiral. The member in question had expressed a preference for split load boards 'every time' and I tried to ask why when RCBOs are now available at quite reasonable prices. I could see why a relatively small price difference may be too much for some customers, but felt that others might be happy to pay a little extra to minimise potential disruption.

Folk have different reasons, different customer bases, etc.

• Some say they will only do RCBO boards as they feel it is the best solution - that is technically valid and saves a bit of fault-finding time in the future
• Others do dual-RCD only - most customers will always choose the cheaper option and doing the installation properly is more important than the specifics of what is chosen

Giving folk a choice seems more democratic, but then take a look at how various democracies are more like idiocracies!

 

[magnoliafan89]

I did an EICR for a 30+ Yr old install. 4 circuits and an RCD covering all.
I didnt fail it on this and didnt think anything of it....should I have???

 

[pc1966]

I did an EICR for a 30+ Yr old install. 4 circuits and an RCD covering all.
I didnt fail it on this and didnt think anything of it....should I have???

No, it is not considered a safety risk (generally*) and not in the best-practice guides or similar to do so.

But if you were planning a new system you ought to take in to account the inconvenience of a fault taking out everything, the higher risk of electronic equipment leakage adding up to the 30mA RCD's trip point (which could be as low as 15mA), and you would not go for a single RCD - the whole starting point for this thread!

* = if it were a workshop or commercial site you would need to think of the safety aspect of loss of lighting supply, so if no emergency lighting then it is a concern. Just my 2p

 

[nicebutdim]

It is always the case that a RCD/RCCB/RCBO provides protection only for the downstream system.

Some folk have argues that in the TT case a non-metallic CU enclosure is safer as loose tails (or lack of entrance grommet), busbar going astray, etc, making contact with the case that are upstream of the incoming RCD do not make the system's CPC live. That may be true, but I suspect that of all the serious CU installation faults you might have a partial contact leading to a fire risk is a bit more likely!

But I still think no single point of failure (at least for things depending on electronics - my own background!) is a good goal for safety-critical systems.

Upstream is the term I was looking for.

A few years back I fitted a 100mA S type RCD upstream of the CUs at my parent's house. This was after they'd had a fault which caused them to receive shocks off metallic surfaces, were let down by several electricians and I discovered that they had an old ELCB which had never been connected.

I ended up buying a Wylex REC2S for its enclosure as I couldn't find anything else that was reasonably compact, insulated and suitable for meter tails without drilling and glanding. I press the test button periodically, when I visit, so they can shout at me for switching off the power.

 

[pc1966]

I press the test button periodically, when I visit, so they can shout at me for switching off the power.

Good to hear that somebody tests the RCD!