Non compliant Meter tails replacement with a non compliant fix!

[bobdabuilda]

Hello all, I am desperate for some advice on a job I had done yesterday by an electrical contractor.

The job was a meter tail replacement and routing to the cu but apparently it does not meet the 17th ed regs. For the sake of brevity the thread I started with relevant pictures of the install, is on this forum Damaged a meter neutral feed cable to CU - DIYnot.com - DIY and Home Improvement.

There have been all manner of answers and irrelevant posts but could a qualified electrician tell me if this install is safe and compliant please?

Thanks

 

[domestic spark]

ive exhausted all my options thekingiam, that was another option i added. think thats it, hope i get thanked for all this work lol

 

[bobdabuilda]

i got to admit i laughed at the people on that diy site stating tape it up!!

The sparky who did it is from your way and he was going to do just that initially.

 

[MarkP]

Think someone should get touting for business round that housing estate. Would be a nice job correcting all those incorrectly installed tails!

Surely there has got to be some comeback on the company that built those houses and the sparks that did the installs.....

 

[MarkP]

i got to admit i laughed at the people on that diy site stating tape it up!!

A little knowledge is dangerous springs to mind!!!!

 

[Deleted member 26818]

So running in the cavity is ok? Why did the contractors say that it wasn't allowed? The meterbox is recessed so I'd have thought it should be easy to run cables in there. I suppose there's is the damp tracking risk?

There's nothing in BS7671 prohibiting such.
I would imagine that the incomming supply cables are in the cavity.
If the cables are allowed to drop down, in the cavity before rising to the CU, I would have thought the damp tracking risk would be minimal.
There is a posibility that in the future debris will drop into the cavity and could be caught by the cable, which would introduce a bridge.
The length of the tails will probablly exceed 3m, and a switch fuse will have to be installed. Not a bad thing.

 

[terminator]

Look like a fairly new build - wouldn't the cavity be full of insulation?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

If you're quick enough, you should be able to get the tails in before too much escapes.
Any that does, you can often just pour back in at the top of the walls from inside the loft.

 

[bobdabuilda]

Look like a fairly new build - wouldn't the cavity be full of insulation?

No insulation in cavity which is another issue altogether as building regs said it should have had when it was built in 1996! All the inner skins are thermal block.

Spinlondon - that's great news so cavity run it is then! The distance will be about 3m max. Fingers xed that they can do it then.

 

[DoBBY]

Now it has been exposed you could quite easily have bodged this job and taped it up and got on with your life. You show that you actually have common sense and care. You could either replace the neutral or have it rewired properly. In my humble opinion, if there is a bit of play in the length of cable, I would replace the neutral cable and expose all wires from behind plasterboard, have the wall re-plasted and install cables in trunken. This is viable as cables are running vertically to a consumer unit.

 

[domestic spark]

Circles, running around I'n

 

[bobdabuilda]

Now it has been exposed you could quite easily have bodged this job and taped it up and got on with your life. You show that you actually have common sense and care. You could either replace the neutral or have it rewired properly. In my humble opinion, if there is a bit of play in the length of cable, I would replace the neutral cable and expose all wires from behind plasterboard, have the wall re-plasted and install cables in trunken. This is viable as cables are running vertically to a consumer unit.

Have a look at page 4 of that thread for pics of what the contractors actually did, which will explain the thread title on here. ie one bodge for another.

 

[DoBBY]

So has he replaced damaged cable?

 

[terminator]

No insulation in cavity which is another issue altogether as building regs said it should have had when it was built in 1996! All the inner skins are thermal block.

In that case there is the likelyhood that you or subsequent owner may have cavities filled with insulation thereby downgrading cable capacity substantially. I think as DoBBY suggested, surface trunking is the answer!

 

[bobdabuilda]

In summary- they were originally going to tape over the damage and chase the original cables in to the thermal block. This then changed to renewing the 25mm tails with 16mm ones(!) chase in 35mm but only capped over with triple capping and non compliant by the route taken. SEE Page 4 of the other thread for pics.

 

[bobdabuilda]

surface trunking internally would look even worse than the external option. Looks like its round in circles again. Surely the potential downrating could be offset by uprating any new run in the cavity? Either way I'd rather the future owners have that problem than drilling or nailing through the current route and suffering the dire consequences....