New extension to existing wiring

[Deleted member 26818]

telectrix has said that a EICR can be used

Yes an EICR is used to report on the condition of an existing installation.
I think your customer is hoping that he can save money by having just the one certificate to cover everything.

Personally, I would conduct the EICR before starting the extension work.
That way, any faults or defects can be found before you start work.

 

[Foxyspark]

Yes an EICR is used to report on the condition of an existing installation.
I think your customer is hoping that he can save money by having just the one certificate to cover everything.

Personally, I would conduct the EICR before starting the extension work.
That way, any faults or defects can be found before you start work.

Yes, we all want to save a little but he does not want any unsafe situation/installation. This is why he has requested a certificate for the complete property after the new refurbishment. I have agreed that the current installation will be inspected and any defects identified. Just needed confirmation that you can have an installation to 2 different regs.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

It’s not so much as having an installation to 2 different Regs.
It’s more to do with the existing installation not having any code 1 or 2 defects or faults.
Also, a lot will depend on how you carry out the work.
For instance you may decide to supply the extension from a new separate CU, and leave the existing on the old CU.
Or you may decide to replace the old CU and install a new CU with extra ways to cover the extension.
This may mean that the existing installation is updated to comply with the 18th edition.

 

[Foxyspark]

It’s not so much as having an installation to 2 different Regs.
It’s more to do with the existing installation not having any code 1 or 2 defects or faults.
Also, a lot will depend on how you carry out the work.
For instance you may decide to supply the extension from a new separate CU, and leave the existing on the old CU.
Or you may decide to replace the old CU and install a new CU with extra ways to cover the extension.
This may mean that the existing installation is updated to comply with the 18th edition.

The existing CU which has RCDs fitted has 2 spare ways so this should not be a problem. Don't need any cooker installation as all is gas.

 

[buzzlightyear]

Just been asked to quote to wire a new kitchen extension. I realise that the new extension must conform to the 18th IEE regs. The existing wiring in the remainder of the building has the sockets lower that the stated 450mm and the light switches are higher than 1200mm. Do these have to be re positioned and rewired?

new extension 450 sockets ,switches 1200 height ,to conform to the regs and building control .

 

[Foxyspark]

new extension 450 sockets ,switches 1200 height ,to conform to the regs and building control .

Yes, agree that new extension will conform to new regs and building regs. It was the existing installation co-existing with the new I was concerned about.

 

[buzzlightyear]

es, agree that new extension will conform to new regs and building regs. It was the existing installation co-existing with the new I was concerned about.

put a new circuits in extension simple .
check the existing board have rcd protection lights /sockets .

 

[SparkyChick]

With regard to socket/switch heights, this is what Approved Document M says about it's application.

"Application

0.2 The recommendations of this volume of this approved document apply to newly erected dwellings, and dwellings undergoing material alteration, only. They do not apply to the extension of a dwelling."

In short, if it's an existing dwelling, it should not be any worse than it was before you started.

So I might be inclined to give the client the choice... maintain the style of the existing part or use Part M for the new bit. But you certainly do not need to change any socket/switch heights on the existing installation.

 

[Foxyspark]

With regard to socket/switch heights, this is what Approved Document M says about it's application.

"Application

0.2 The recommendations of this volume of this approved document apply to newly erected dwellings, and dwellings undergoing material alteration, only. They do not apply to the extension of a dwelling."

In short, if it's an existing dwelling, it should not be any worse than it was before you started.

So I might be inclined to give the client the choice... maintain the style of the existing part or use Part M for the new bit. But you certainly do not need to change any socket/switch heights on the existing installation.

Thanks to all that contributed to my query. I believe that I can not safetly proceed. The client will aso be happy that he doesn't need a rewire and re plaster.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

It's all been said really but I'll say my bit anyway

I had the same question for Stroma recently for a rewire. Stroma said I needed to have all sockets/switches at the building regs heights. I decided not to due to the following:

BS7672 only says the socket has to be mounted at a suitable height so it will not be damaged.

Part M of the building regs does indeed give certain heights, however, Section 0, 0.2 states that
"The recommendations of this volume of this approved document apply to newly erected dwellings, and dwellings undergoing material alteration, only. They do not apply to the extension of a dwelling."

So a rewire cannot be classed as a newly erected dwelling but the building inspector may say it is a 'material alteration' (even though it's not). Here's what you can then say:

Part M, Volume 1, Section 0, 0.11

If it is a material alteration then the dwelling should be 'no less compliant'. Therefore using existing heights will be ok (as long as they meet BS7671 553.1.6).

Also, The definition of a material alteration is found in the
Building regulations (2010), Part 2, Regulation 3(1)c and 3(2) a and b:

A material alteration is an alteration where the work, or any part of it, would at any stage result:

"In a building or controlled service or fitting not complying with a relevant requirement where previously it did, or

In a building or controlled service or fitting which before the work commenced did not comply with a relevant requirement, being more unsatisfactory in relation to such a requirement."

I'm ready for any inspector!!