Peoples thoughts Rcd protection

[Gazthesparky]

I can not make up my mind what to do for the best.

I've now encountered this a few times so just want peoples thoughts on this situation

I have a customer who wants single socket fronts swapping for double conversion sockets they don't want the mess to the decoration.

I went out to quote for the work and check the wiring all PVC so good there but there is no RCD protection on any of the 3 socket circuits. The board is a GET 60898 MCB board confuses me why people installed boards with no rcd protection at least on the socket circuits.

So if i look at installing RCBOs in-place of the breakers its very expensive plus GET doesn't exist anymore as i believe schneider brought GET out so at best im hoping one of those RCBOs will fit.

But doing this means that the 3 RCBOS that are required cost more than the materials cost for the sockets and customers are not prepared to paythe extra cost.

So my question is as i'm just replacing the socket fronts and not actually altering the wiring do I need to install RCD protection to the circuit? If I was altering the circuit I would of course install it with RCD protection. I always carry out testing and provide a test certificate but I know from conversations on the forum before that some of you suggest that simply replacing an accessory front doesn't require testing and certification.

So just want to get peoples thoughts as its adding an extra 72ish quid to my quote. My thoughts are not to do the RCBO addition as i'm not altering the circuit just doing replacement. Then listing it as a note on the test certificate

Cheers for your thoughts/recommendations

 

[Nigel]

When confronted with this kind of job you can only advise that RCD protection would help improve safety.There is no law that states that they must have it.If the customer refuses your advice then fit the new sockets,test earthing,insulation etc and put on your invoice that RCD protection was offered but customer declined and then get them to sign it.You have left the job no less safe than when you arrived and if anything happens then it's on the customers stupid head.Or you can walk away from the job......

Are people really that desperate for work?

“I priced to install earthing but the customer just never wanted it so I never installed it”

What a joke.

 

[johnduffell]

rcbo is better than the alternative aesthetic...

and only 15quid a pop may be lucky to save much off the bill!
https://www.screwfix.com/p/british-general-13a-2g-rcd-switched-plug-socket/3133J

 

[Octopus]

Because BS7671 says they do.

Reg number?

the OP isn't adding sockets simply changing them from 1G to 2G ... that in my book isn't adding "points"

I do agree that advice to the client would be to add RCD protection / change the CU

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Reg number?

the OP isn't adding sockets simply changing them from 1G to 2G ... that in my book isn't adding "points"

I do agree that advice to the client would be to add RCD protection / change the CU

IMO changing a number of singles to doubles in the OP's proposed way constitutes 'an alteration or addition' and therefore must meet the requirements of Bs7671, including RCD, testing and bonding. The OP is going to be removing the existing single flush box and installing a double, not simply fitting a like for like replacement accessory.

 

[johnduffell]

IMO changing a number of singles to doubles in the OP's proposed way constitutes 'an alteration or addition

Id agree, i think the intent of the regs is to allow maintenance of the installation without triggering the need to update, but any improvements would be only permissible with the updated regs. This is to drag as much up to the new standard at the point of other investment, but not prevent maintenance.
I would say that changing a single socket to an fcu or vice versa would also be ok, for example changing a hard wired dishwasher to a plugged in one, as the installation hadn't been improved, although you could argue it's an alteration from a plain English point of view.

 

[Deleted account]

Inform customer they need rcd protection for you to carry out job. Give them price.

They either accept it or they don't.

Simple.

 

[Nigel]

When confronted with this kind of job you can only advise that RCD protection would help improve safety.There is no law that states that they must have it.If the customer refuses your advice then fit the new sockets,test earthing,insulation etc and put on your invoice that RCD protection was offered but customer declined and then get them to sign it.You have left the job no less safe than when you arrived and if anything happens then it's on the customers stupid head.Or you can walk away from the job......

Are people really that desperate for work?

“I priced to install earthing but the customer just never wanted it so I never installed it”

What a joke.

Reg number?

the OP isn't adding sockets simply changing them from 1G to 2G ... that in my book isn't adding "points"

I do agree that advice to the client would be to add RCD protection / change the CU

In my mind he is removing and installing.

 

[Midwest]

Id agree, i think the intent of the regs is to allow maintenance of the installation without triggering the need to update, but any improvements would be only permissible with the updated regs. This is to drag as much up to the new standard at the point of other investment, but not prevent maintenance.
I would say that changing a single socket to an fcu or vice versa would also be ok, for example changing a hard wired dishwasher to a plugged in one, as the installation hadn't been improved, although you could argue it's an alteration from a plain English point of view.

I sort guidance from my scheme, on replacing an FCU to a single socket on an unprotected RCD circuit. Their guidance was, it was not classed as maintenance or like for like change. Therefore it had to be RCD socket. The proposed use of the socket, was not for a specific appliance however.

 

[Wilko]

My thought is DIY would do the change without a thought, but I would like to do better. It wouldn't feel right (to me) to work to DIY standard, regs or no.

 

[Spoon]

@Bob Geldoff1234 . You can't really put a 'Dumb' rating on @essex post. It's using the same principle you are using in your post, or is your post 'Dumb'?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

To my mind, if you are adding a socket, then at the least the extra socket requires RCD protection.
Then again I can go out and purchase an adapter which will cover a double socket and turn it into a triple socket.
There are also those surface double sockets where you remove the single face plate connect the wires into some connector blocks then screw through the double socket into the lugs on the single back box.
Not to mention the normal adapters and extension leads.

 

[Gazthesparky]

Right all valid points raised. I am in the camp of putting RCD protection on anyway regardless as it improves the safety of the circuit.

If I was knocking out boxes and installing new double boxes or adding and extending the circuit in my eyes I have altered and installed new so my work has to be up to current regs and hence have RCD protection.

On this particular job the client wants the adapter sockets so I am not changing back boxes or wiring just changing the face plates hence why I asked everyone’s thoughts

When I have quoted on jobs like this before I have quoted for RCD coverage and explain to the customer it offers more protection.

Some as you say some customers accept that I have had others that look stunned and even had one say I’m just creating work to Charge more money. And it’s extortion that I’m charging that to just swap a few sockets.

I just wanted peoples opinions on the matter because I always work to the highest of standards. Its just a reassurance check that I’m not going over the top. For example quoting for a rolls Royce when a Mini metro would suffice

I would always want the Rolls on the drive and would pay for it but some people would just want the mini metro to get from A to B

 

[Octopus]

@Bob Geldoff1234 . You can't really put a 'Dumb' rating on @essex post. It's using the same principle you are using in your post, or is your post 'Dumb'?

Bob Geldoff1234 has done this to me before, more than once, but not offered up any thoughts or backed it up with any views

This user also "limits" access to their profile - so obviously something to hide.

 

[Spoon]

Bob Geldoff1234 has done this to me before, more than once, but not offered up any thoughts or backed it up with any views

This user also "limits" access to their profile - so obviously something to hide.

He might be jealous of your stunning good looks, wonderful physique, super intelligence and the way you hit it with the chicks....

 

[ferg]

This user also "limits" access to their profile - so obviously something to hide.

What is this obsession with people hiding profiles all about.

I just don't get it TBH.