You're all cowboys! :D

[D Skelton]

So a customer phones up and wants a socket adding. For arguments sake it is to be surface mounted about a meter from an existing socket and cable is to be run in trunking. A quick and easy job for most

When you arrive, you find that the CU is an old rewireable, there's no RCD protection anywhere and bonding doesn't exist. You explain to the customer that what he originally thought would be a £40 job is now going to cost him £150 and his response is to laugh. Now just before the point where he tells you to get lost, there is a miniscule moment of time for you to come up with a way to resolve this problem.

Now in this situation, we should all know what is the right and what is the wrong way to approach this situation however my question is, what would you do?

Would you:

A. Let him tell you to get lost, don't do the work and walk away knowing full well that DIY Dan will be round the next morning to do the job.

B. Tell him that this is how it should be done but do the job anyway noting on the MWC that the customer did not want to pay to add an RCD spur/socket and bonding even though you advised him otherwise.

C. Tell him you'll do the job for cash but there will be no cert and that he understands that you were never there.

Lets have some honest answers please people. And no looking down your nose at people who select differently to you!

 

[Octopus]

This is an example of why the update to the 17th edition was a complete missed opportunity. Additional sockets should be allowed without RCD protection and as for compulsory adding bonding don't go there.

I abide by the regs but a few around me don't.

 

[JamesBrownLive]

I don't think option 'B' is viable, as all you would be doing is putting your name to a document that essentially says you've broken the rules. Remember, the customer cannot absolve you of wrongdoing, as in the eyes of the law, they are not competent to do so. So really, its A or C.

Cheers

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Honestly?....probably C ......I would add that the install does not meet current standards,but that adding this socket will not in any way reduce the present safety of the installation. I would NOT undertake any more extensive work than the described...but bonding aside,prior to 2008 the install you describe would have complied anyway..(just 4 years ago!)

 

[ratboymark]

happens to me loads i always use the top option and once or twice the client has told me of a guy how will do it regardless of regs. and one time i got tricked the client said yeah that sounds ok if you sort the socket out first then we can be using it, then put your earth cable in but then told me to ****** when i came to put bonding in. i rang NICEIC they said issue a END and leave.

 

[Knobhead]

Oi! Starting arguments is my domain.

I would say cash in hand, but as I don’t do any domestic work now (didn’t do much before) so it’s irrelevant to me. I suppose my thinking would be if I do it, it will be safe, will it be safe if Joe from down the pub does it.
Plus there are some beer tokens to spend “down the pub”.
View attachment 10566

 

[Deleted member 9648]

I would add that the RCD 'fix' often advocated,such as using an RCD FCU for one extra point when there is no other RCD in the place,just to comply with the regs is the height stupidity as far as I'm concerned..I flatly refuse to go down that road.Either protect the whole lot or dont bother at all.

 

[ackbarthestar]

Given the staggering sums involved I tend to do 'A' , particularly where the customer seems so shocked that they are considering they are doing you a service.
No point in compromise and loosing sleep over the possibility that the customer will have you over a barrel when they come to sell the house which, of course, they didn't mention

 

[SPARTYKUS]

I would add that the RCD 'fix' often advocated,such as using an RCD FCU for one extra point when there is no other RCD in the place,just to comply with the regs is the height stupidity as far as I'm concerned..I flatly refuse to go down that road.Either protect the whole lot or dont bother at all.

Youd love to work with me then friday. Thats exactly what Im doing, rcd spur socket spurred (surface) from another

 

[Paul.M]

I'm going to go with option D:-

The cable is surface mounted (in trunking) and so is the skt. No rcd protection needed unless its in a special zone or being used for outdoor equipment. A mwc is needed but its not notifiable. Or have I misread the question???

 

[D Skelton]

Erm, I think you'll find that under the 17th all sockets must have RCD protection unless it is for a specific and dedicated pupose and labelled this way. Tell me if I'm wrong? Still gotta do the bonding anyway.

My decision: There is no option D

 

[pencilpusher]

A: Seeing as I like to sleep at night, I would walk away. There is no way the small profit made from this job is worth the grief IF it goes t*ts up!

:juggle2:

 

[Paul.M]

I'm sorry Mr Skelton I disagree. By your description of the extra socket rcd protection is not needed under the regs. (although you and me being professional we would like/insist on it) that's what the regs say.

Long as we follow reg 131.8 & 601.4 before we comence our work, its ok with the regs.

Option D is something you overlooked.

 

[D Skelton]

Regulation 411.3.3: In a.c. systems, additional protection by means of an RCD in accordance with regulation 415.1 shall be provided for socket-outlets with a rated current not exceeding 20A that are for use by ordinary persons and are intended for general use.

 

[D Skelton]

Regulation 411.3.3: In a.c. systems, additional protection by means of an RCD in accordance with regulation 415.1 shall be provided for socket-outlets with a rated current not exceeding 20A that are for use by ordinary persons and are intended for general use.

You're right, yes, but the bonding would still need to be done to comply with the regs. Anyway, we're starting to digress, all I was after was an A, B or C.

In reality, what would you guys do? regardless of whether it is to the regs or not?