You're all cowboys! :D

[Paul.M]

Option E:- Buy him/her a 1 meter double socket extention lead for a fiver. Not fixed wiring, nothing to do with the regs and customer gets what he wants, simples.

 

[ackbarthestar]

It is possible to assess the risk from lack of bonding you know....what is the risk of simultaneous contact between CP's and ECP's in relation to the whole install and the minor addition?....assess and decide whether or not to proceed.....some might say that simply walking away is unprofessional.

Others might say: You will leave yourself wide open to, best case, ridicule and worst case, prosecution. OAPs notwithstanding.

Experience tells us a lot of things but doesn't prepare us for the unpredictable event.

 

[brightspark2010]

Had a quick read of the regs quoted paul is this to be interpreted that if it is i) a 16/20amp circuit the sockets require 30ma protection however if its ii) a 32A ring/radial the 30ma protection is only required for outdoors as in 16th

 

[nickblake]

Me i would go for other option yes i know its not there his board is old there is no bonding , a socket which could be used for outside has to be RCD protected ,which basically means any socket in the house ive see extensions run from the 3rd floor window to out side and look at all the outside exmas lights , me i would say you have to install bonding you have to have the RCD and a cert will be issued etc , if i dont get the job and mr DIY comes and does it then fine ,and if it all goes wrong it wont be me in court !!

 

[richy3333]

WHS

We are talking about the lack of bonding NOT the lack of a main earth.

The problem with the regs is that ask 10 sparks about it and you will get 15 answers this is where proper training comes in and the ability to interpret them and assess the risks.

No doubt you've now had time to look at the Regs book It clearly refers to bonding so I don't understand where the confusion is. 132.16 Clearly says that the earthing and BONDING shall be adequate. Why would that generate 15 different answers?

 

[Guest123]

Had a quick read of the regs quoted paul is this to be interpreted that if it is i) a 16/20amp circuit the sockets require 30ma protection however if its ii) a 32A ring/radial the 30ma protection is only required for outdoors as in 16th

No, it's the actual rating of the socket outlet that is referred to here, i.e, a standard BS 1363 socket outlet is rated at 13A and therefore falls under the 411.3.3 (i) regulation.

 

[Matty o]

To be honest i couldn't be bothered as it think we are going to have to disagree, although i do agree that you are right in a ideal world

As to the generating answers we are on post 66 and still not got a straight definitive answer.

Referring to a early question i posed
Does this mean you would refuse to replace a broken socket front in this house.

 

[D Skelton]

I think there is more to consider here than is first apparent. If the client could well afford to have their install upgraded then I would walk away. If the client was an OAP,who could not afford to upgrade,and needed an extra socket...and in my opinion based on 30yrs in the game(most of it as a full NIC approved)...adding one socket not on an RCD and with no bonding would not reduce the current safety of the install,then yes....I may well do it as a cash job with no cert....I dont think that is necessarily unprofessional,especially when the said install has been in perfectly satisfactory use for 30 or 40 years,and probably will be for another 20 or 30.
It is possible to assess the risk from lack of bonding you know....what is the risk of simultaneous contact between CP's and ECP's in relation to the whole install and the minor addition?....assess and decide whether or not to proceed.....some might say that simply walking away is unprofessional.

Couldn't have put it better myself!

Ok Mr Skelton what did you do? I guess you were professional and walked away.

I have done both A and C, funnily enough for the exact reasons outlined above in wirepullers post and I have no shame or guilt in admitting that.

And I've never done B as I would never put my name to something that is technically wrong, and a little bit naughty.

 

[D Skelton]

Does this mean you would refuse to replace a broken socket front in this house.

Like for like changes are permitted no matter what the current state of the installation is

 

[Matty o]

I know
It highlights another problem with the regs, changing a socket front or spurring a new surface mounted socket 1m next to it it treated so differently but in reality is the same outcome.

Major work like adding a new circuit i agree is diffrent.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

I know
It highlights another problem with the regs, changing a socket front or spurring a new surface mounted socket 1m next to it it treated so differently but in reality is the same outcome.

Major work like adding a new circuit i agree is diffrent.

This is where grey areas creep in....like for like...a broken single for a new single....is changing that broken single for a twin different?....would you not need to upgrade the bonding/RCD if it stays as a single...but would need to upgrade it if it became a twin?...(the same kind of lunacy as an RCD FCU for one extra socket in a bedroom with no other RCD in the house)....there seems now to be a blind adherence to the 'regs' because of a fear of ending up in court...when there was a time when a professional electrician could make a judgement on departures from the 'regs'......be bloody glad when I'm out of it.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

The problem with this thread, is that there appears to be quite a bit of misinformation and mis-quotation of the Regulations.
For instance, 131.8/132.16 does not state the earthing and bonding must be adequate, it states "the earthing and bonding arrangements, if neccessary for the protective measure applied for the safety of the addition or alteration, shall be adequate."
Being adequate, does not neccessarily equate to compliance with the Regulations.
In this particular case, the protective measure applied will be ADS, and if the socket-outlet is intended for general use by an ordinary person, or to supply mobile equipment outdoors, there shall be aditional protection by use of a 30mA RCD.
Bonding is not neccessary in order for either of these protective measures to operate.
As such, unless there are two or more extraneous-conductive-parts that can be simultaneously touched, it can be argued that the installation of Main Protective Bonding is not required.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Good point Spin.....although I guess the 'what if you are taken to court' school of thought would argue that a CP from the socket could be taken within reach of an ECP by means of an extension lead..!

 

[Matty o]

This is my point the regs are not law and do not cover every situation and they should come with a highly trained professionally to interpret them and assesses the risks of each job.

And last week i broke the speed limit in the van and once on a night out i had a **** behind the jobcentre

 

[Heisenberg]

For those of you with a website, having a link to this and requesting that all potential customers read it, might just help should any issues relating to this become apparent further down the line.

http://www.esc.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/public/leaflets/E_B2011webA4screen.pdf

At the very least it will make the customer aware that it is not just something you have dreamed up, to enable you to gouge them of their hard earned moolah.

We often talk about the government not doing enough to educate the public, so instead of moaning about it we should be doing all we can to educate our own customers.

You know it makes sense, Rodney :greedy: