OK Not sure or totally wrong

[Robinson]

Got a builder friend who is having trouble with a client, the client is trying to bill my friend for work his electrician done. Basically the client has had some addition work
done by an electrician who has said that The previous sparks has taken a feed for some outside lights, from the smoke detector supply.
Smokes and heat on own circuit and but they have ran a L/N to a switch for two couple of garden lights.

The new sparks has said its totally illegal and should not of been done so he must rectify it at a cost of £300. guy has said go ahead and now trying to claim from my mate.

What is the deal here , i mean i know other way around is fine Smokes on regularly used lighting circuit is not a problem but is there any regs that recommends this MUST NOT be done?
OK not great practice BUT is this a NO NO..


I would thought if all labelled and identified at board with correct rating mcb plus RCD protection its ok. agree not best practice but possible?

Any thoughts.

 

[stuart569]

Do not see a problem here.As you have said as long as it is labelled/marked up at board it would be ok!Can he quote a regulation that states other-ways?

 

[mark80]

Although maybe not the best practice in the world as you have said, but aslong as everthing is labelled and sized correctly etc, theres nothing wrong with it! You do what has to be done with the circumstances you are faced with! Really annoys me these people that make their own regs up and think they can just condemn stuff thats not up to their expectations, and charge the client because of it!

 

[Robinson]

This what i have asked for, Reg Quote to back up his thoughts

 

[Robinson]

OK any regs that ones can think that would say it ok.....nothing really i can think of as its kinda just silly obvious stuff. as already said. I was just a bit startled at the tone of letter he showed me
Th guy was propa giving it As you say marko80 making his regs up to condemm.

 

[Robinson]

..nothing really i can think of as its kinda just silly obvious stuff.

Sorry not SILLY stuff at all serious really as correct cable sizing rating protection is essential. but you get me.

 

[Octopus]

Personally I can't see an issue with having "smokes" and outside lights on the same circuit. As others have said as long as the CU is labelled properly there's no issue.

As for "illegal" what a load of bxllxcks.

 

[IQ Electrical]

This what i have asked for, Reg Quote to back up his thoughts

There are no 'regs' for that circumstance, merely guidance in Approved Document B and BS 5839-6.

Guidance is......guidance.

 

[Robinson]

Personally I can't see an issue with having "smokes" and outside lights on the same circuit. As others have said as long as the CU is labelled properly there's no issue.

As for "illegal" what a load of bxllxcks.

I know ILLEGAL i mean thats a serious staement

 

[Robinson]

There are no 'regs' for that circumstance, merely guidance in Approved Document B and BS 5839-6.

Guidance is......guidance.

IQ as far as you may be aware in Doc B and 5839-6 can you think of top head what would guidance would this situation being going against? im no where near anything to look. unless i can see online?

 

[telectrix]

tell your builder friend that the "client" is a chancer trying it on. as said before, he can ask the idiot what law or regulation is being contravened. if he can;t come up with one, then to tell him bollox

 

[mark80]

Either way as IQ has said, whether there is guidance or not, it is not enforceable or makes the circuit unsafe! If it was me, I'd now be asking for a refund for unnecessary works carried out!

 

[Rockingit]

what's the betting that the 'electrician' that is claiming this is a 5 week DI wonder?

 

[GLENNSPARK]

Maybe this guy has a "list" of storys (well rehearsed of course) that he wheels out when needed..........

 

[Paul.M]

Contact your labc and ask them? I bet they say "nothing wrong with that", unless you get a jobs worth. Then ask him what reg? I bet he can't .