Domestic - Bad practice V's ILLEGAL?

[1shortcircuit]

I was hoping someone wouldn't mind giving me a shove in the right direction regarding something I saw today, Pleeease .

I kept my mouth shut because I didn't want to open a can of worms without having the ammo to back up any explanation required.

Cooker radial non RCD protected (No RCD in entire house)

Electric oven, old stylee.

During a few tests (additional socket required upstairs) I noticed that 2 x Double sockets were still on when the rest of the sockets in the house had been switched off???

Only turns out that they're spurred from the Cooker isolator!

Now I didn't look too closely, although I did mention to the client that whilst I believe it to be bad practice I am unaware of the Legality side of it but I would look into it.

The reason I did not go poking around too much is because I was only there to quote for additional work and had another appointment to go to straight after but I would like to be able to return with my quote and the necesary information to address this situation.

The client is not the home owner but she does pay for repairs etc

If someone can help me out with Reg numbers so that I can look this up it would be much appreciated.

Regards

1SC

 

[IQ Electrical]

I was hoping someone wouldn't mind giving me a shove in the right direction regarding something I saw today, Pleeease .

I kept my mouth shut because I didn't want to open a can of worms without having the ammo to back up any explanation required.

Cooker radial non RCD protected (No RCD in entire house)

Electric oven, old stylee.

During a few tests (additional socket required upstairs) I noticed that 2 x Double sockets were still on when the rest of the sockets in the house had been switched off???

Only turns out that they're spurred from the Cooker isolator!

Now I didn't look too closely, although I did mention to the client that whilst I believe it to be bad practice I am unaware of the Legality side of it but I would look into it.

The reason I did not go poking around too much is because I was only there to quote for additional work and had another appointment to go to straight after but I would like to be able to return with my quote and the necesary information to address this situation.

The client is not the home owner but she does pay for repairs etc

If someone can help me out with Reg numbers so that I can look this up it would be much appreciated.

Regards

1SC

Depending on what the sockets are wired in (CSA) and the overcurrent device on the 'cooker circuit' it could be bad practice or dangerous but not 'illegal'

If the sockets are wired in say 6.0mm and the overcurrent device is say a 32A rating then in effect, you've got a correctly designed but unusual radial circuit.

If (as I suspect) the Device is a 32A or 40A or even 45A rating and the sockets are wired in 2.5mm then the potential for overload of the cable is there.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

First off, it's not illegal, unless the work was carried out after Part P came into force.
As for the Regulations it contravenes, the only ones that spring to mind are:
134.1.1 "Good workmanship by competent persons or persons under their supervision and proper materials shall be used in the erection of the electrical installation. Electrical equipment shall be installed in accordance with the instructions provided by the manufacturer of the equipment."
Depending on the size of the conductors used for the spur:
433.2.1 "Except where Regulation 433.2.2 or 433.3 applies, a device for protection against overload shall be installed at the point where a reduction occurs in the value of the current carrying-capacity of the conductors of the installation."

 

[oldtimer]

My understanding is that a shower or cooker circuit are deemed as dedicated circuits ie from the DB to the shower or cooker as for bad practice I just will not spur off these circuits although I have seen a bathroom wall light spurred of a shower circuit where the owner could not get it through his head that a 1.0mm T&E rated at 6 amps should not be spurred off a 32 amp circuit via a joint box in the attic I tried to explain to him that the joint box was the weakest link but as he was getting a new DB fitted due to an extention I would have thought the registered installer would have spotted it but me dont think so.

 

[dingledong]

iq is right again it is a radial circuit and depending on cable size it would be accepted though its a bit of a bugger getting 2x6mls into the back of a socket

 

[1shortcircuit]

Thanks IQ, that's answered my question brilliantly :thumbsup

The protective device is a 3036 30A rewireable fuse which supplies Isolator (with socket) in 6mm Twin & CPC so hopefully this will also supply the two sockets, I won't be surprised if I do find 2.5mm there instead though.

 

[1shortcircuit]

the owner could not get it through his head that a 1.0mm T&E rated at 6 amps should not be spurred off a 32 amp circuit via a joint box in the attic

Did you create a thread regarding this one? I know I've read something very similar on here in the past :thumbsup

iq is right again it is a radial circuit and depending on cable size it would be accepted though its a bit of a bugger getting 2x6mls into the back of a socket

That's a good thought, perhaps there's a JB plastered into the wall with 2 x 6mm coming out? :lol

 

[IQ Electrical]

Thanks IQ, that's answered my question brilliantly :thumbsup

The protective device is a 3036 30A rewireable fuse which supplies Isolator (with socket) in 6mm Twin & CPC so hopefully this will also supply the two sockets, I won't be surprised if I do find 2.5mm there instead though.

It's still hard to believe that anyone would chose to install sockets in that manner, even if you can just about argue compliance!

 

[telectrix]

I won't be surprised if I do find 2.5mm there instead though.

don't bank on it. could be 5A flex.

 

[1shortcircuit]

First off, it's not illegal, unless the work was carried out after Part P came into force.
As for the Regulations it contravenes, the only ones that spring to mind are:
134.1.1 "Good workmanship by competent persons or persons under their supervision and proper materials shall be used in the erection of the electrical installation. Electrical equipment shall be installed in accordance with the instructions provided by the manufacturer of the equipment."
Depending on the size of the conductors used for the spur:
433.2.1 "Except where Regulation 433.2.2 or 433.3 applies, a device for protection against overload shall be installed at the point where a reduction occurs in the value of the current carrying-capacity of the conductors of the installation."

Thanks for pointing out the Regs Spin, I had no idea where to start looking with regards to this situation :thumbsup