New house - does the CU comply to the current regs

[Octopus]

So I was in a new build today - signed off 3 months ago...

No surface trunking, all cables in walls and ceilings ..... the OCPD's for circuits 1 to 3 look wrong to me

Discuss!

 

[DPG]

domsta72 - why all the 'dumb' ratings??

 

[Risteard]

Simply no RCD protection when these circuits are almost certainly have cables in the wall less than 50mm deep.

OK sorry get you now. I thought you were saying there was something wrong with the positioning of the isolator.

 

[Risteard]

Simply no RCD protection when these circuits are almost certainly have cables in the wall less than 50mm deep.

OK sorry get you now. I thought you were saying there was something wrong with the positioning of the isolator.

 

[Sparkingmad]

I wonder if that site was used under the yearly inspection for NICEIC

Walls aren't generally boarded over here, sand and cement and floated out before being skimmed

the old fashioned way then, with oval tube so you can move cables up and down to leave some slack if needed.

 

[Risteard]

I wonder if that site was used under the yearly inspection for NICEIC

the old fashioned way then, with oval tube so you can move cables up and down to leave some slack if needed.

Oval conduit isn't really used here. Almost always round for drops.

 

[Des 56]

Another wave of dumb ratings by a member who does not otherwise contribute

I would like to challenge that person to enter the discussion with his own opinions,(no chance)

It could be mulled over by those who were the recipients of that members dismissive rating award

 

[Rpa07]

It’s the way people scroll on their phones. The dumb button should be moved and replaced with the like button. I’ll bet I’m right. People have no idea that they do it.
I did it by accident and got a PM for it - I apologised and retracted. No money changed hands.

 

[Sparkingmad]

Oval conduit isn't really used here. Almost always round for drops.

Round is usually reserved only for C/U drops, kitchen and surface mount in garages.

I had to go to an insurance job today to isolate lights and accessories where plaster and ceilings were being stripped off due to water damage. Cables were nailed yes nailed to block work using clout nails no clips and then sand & cement rendered with plaster top coat. Only saving grace they didn’t nail through the middle of the cables. Then went to newly installed metal board that had been fitted to supply new shower and induction hob. No insulating gland on main incoming cables, no grommet strip even or any attempt to protect main cables and then the shocker when I looked at the cables I thought this ain’t what I think it is! Surely no one is that stupid! My mistake they bloody were. They had used some internal cable linking kit for consumer units as main tails to this board from Isco block, run through unprotected metal drilled hole. How this passed any inspection and how it never went bang I will never know. So I removed the supply from the Isco blocks till I go back.

 

[Octopus]

UPDATE:

The homeowner is a friend of the misses ......... so she asked the developer about this and a couple of other snags in the house.

Their response to the question of the OCPD's was:

"
Concerning the Over Current Protective Devices on circuits

1 - Cooker, 60898 Mcb 32 amp rating

2 - Immersion, 60898 Mcb 20 amp rating

3 - Smoke Detectors 60898 Mcb 6 amp rating

(1) These circuits do comply with current regulations as 17th edition Amendment 3 states :

Cables at a depth of 50mm or greater in a wall ,as long as said wall is not constructed with metal framework (property is timber framed) that are mechanically protected do not require rcd protection."

So fair enough, but I'm still more than a little curious how they can prove any of the above ............. as nothing is stated on the certificate and any subsequent EICR would almost certainly result in a C2 ........ because no inspector is going to start pulling the house apart to look for this confirmation.

Personally I would have put the smokes on the lights, and the oven and immersion on the 2 RCD's

Very odd.


Maybe the spark concerned is on here and has read this thread.

So if you are ............. no I'm not with the NICEIC, I'm registered with Stroma !

 

[Deleted member 9648]

 

[Ian1981]

UPDATE:

The homeowner is a friend of the misses ......... so she asked the developer about this and a couple of other snags in the house.

Their response to the question of the OCPD's was:

"
Concerning the Over Current Protective Devices on circuits

1 - Cooker, 60898 Mcb 32 amp rating

2 - Immersion, 60898 Mcb 20 amp rating

3 - Smoke Detectors 60898 Mcb 6 amp rating

(1) These circuits do comply with current regulations as 17th edition Amendment 3 states :

Cables at a depth of 50mm or greater in a wall ,as long as said wall is not constructed with metal framework (property is timber framed) that are mechanically protected do not require rcd protection."

So fair enough, but I'm still more than a little curious how they can prove any of the above ............. as nothing is stated on the certificate and any subsequent EICR would almost certainly result in a C2 ........ because no inspector is going to start pulling the house apart to look for this confirmation.

Personally I would have put the smokes on the lights, and the oven and immersion on the 2 RCD's

Very odd.


Maybe the spark concerned is on here and has read this thread.

So if you are ............. no I'm not with the NICEIC, I'm registered with Stroma !

But on a eicr cables concealed in a wall less than 50mm from surface would be a C3 and not a C2 ,timber framed walls and solid block work with no mechanical protection and no earthed containment

 

[Octopus]

But on a eicr cables concealed in a wall less than 50mm from surface would be a C3 and not a C2 ,timber framed walls and solid block work with no mechanical protection and no earthed containment

Not sure I agree with that for such a new property ............. sure a C3 for an older property...

 

[Ian1981]

Not sure I agree with that for such a new property ............. sure a C3 for an older property...

But what’s the difference with the age?
It’s either potentially dangerous C2 or a recommendation of safety is recorded C3.
If it was tested in the recommended 10 years,age would count for nothing
Agree that if it’s new it’s more of a non compliance issue.

 

[Octopus]

^^ thats a very interesting "grey" area.

An installation under the 17th ed should have RCD protection for the cables .................. so we can give up fitting RCD's for cables in walls and lighting and everybody is happy?

 

[Ian1981]

NO but that is why we apply the correct code.
Which in whatever installation regardless of age it would be a C3 for timber frames and block/brick work.
If you tested this property in 5 years surely you would not C2 it.
When the 16th changed to the 17th and rcd protection was required for cables in walls then it didn’t render all the 16th edition installations dangerous over night or with in the space of a few months or 1 year.

For me if this property was being sold and a eicr was required from the buyers solicitor, I would code this non compliance a C3 regardless if the installation is 1 year old or 20 years old.