Hager Metal Consumer Units

[shanky887614]

i dont mind metal db's the one thing i would like them to change is get rid of all knockouts, there always in the wrong place

 

[Engineer54]

I don't need to be a rebel for my life to mean something. I am not only a sparky but I am in business. It is just not good business to go against BS7671 IMO.

So all those sole traders out there aren't in business then?? lol!!
So what do you do when you can't find a definitive answer in BS 7671 or in any of it's picture books??

Don't tell me, come on here to get half a dozen different answers...

 

[Essex_]

So all those sole traders out there aren't in business then?? lol!!
So what do you do when you can't find a definitive answer in BS 7671 or in any of it's picture books??

Don't tell me, come on here to get half a dozen different answers...

Of course they are. I was a ST for a long time also. I am simply saying. For me, it makes good business sense to follow the regs. To the laymen all they want is to know that their installation is installed to the regs.

I know squat about building a house but what I do know is that if a builder said to me 'listen mate, don't you worry about building regs 'cause parts of it are BS. I will do what I think is best." I would say goodbye.

 

[UNG]

Some interesting reading here . Looks like electrical distribution accounts for about 10 - 12% of dwelling fires over the last 3 years yet cooking appliances account for 52% of the dwelling fires in the same period. Pity they don't further breakdown / analyse the cause of the electrical distribution fires which obviously includes the DNO equipment

It seems to be with the new amendment acceptable to contain a fire which IMO could pose a greater risk by it not being detected early than to actually review why the numbers of fires have increased so dramatically over the last few years.

Using the LFB stats it could be argued that the number of consumer unit fires is 11 times greater now than 6 years ago, 5 times greater now than 5 years ago and 3.5 times greater now than 4 years ago, so should the IET be looking a little closer to home as it would appear that this has all happened under the 17th edition regs couple this with Part P increasing the safety of electrical work in the domestic sector and the perceived skills shortage that was addressed with 17 day and 5 week courses it really does give food for thought as to whether anybody has actually looked at the bigger picture

The last 5 - 6 years has probably seen the highest number of consumer unit swap outs due to not being "compliant" with the 17th edition since electricity came into general use given the factors highlighted previously is it any wonder why this is happening statistics can have a use but are generally flawed by a lack of analysis or swayed by those producing them and can provoke knee jerk reactions that don't actually address the cause as appears to be the case with this change.

The "eg metal" has been jumped on to prempt wholesale change to metal consumer units without looking at whether any of the moulded variants comply or could comply with modification are we going back to the days of that rusty consumer unit on the garage wall because metals good plastic is bad.

This issue could have been dealt with by amending the building regs with the type of consumer unit installed or housing containing it based on risk to occupants should a fire occur if it is in the escape route

For info LFB stats
Number of fires

• 2005/06 - 27
• 2006/07 - 28
• 2007/08 - 33
• 2008/09 - 21
• 2009/10 54
• 2010/11 - 73
• 2011/12 - 71
• 2012/13 - 220
• 2013/14 - 253

 

[UNG]

Of course they are. I was a ST for a long time also. I am simply saying. For me, it makes good business sense to follow the regs. To the laymen all they want is to know that their installation is installed for the lowest price.

I know squat about building a house but what I do know is that if a builder said to me 'listen mate, don't you worry about building regs 'cause parts of it are BS. I will do what I think is best." I would say goodbye.

Corrected that for you

 

[Essex_]

Corrected that for you

Then it becomes a moral thing. We can all do it for the lowest price but where do you draw the line?

 

[Engineer54]

Some interesting reading here . Looks like electrical distribution accounts for about 10 - 12% of dwelling fires over the last 3 years yet cooking appliances account for 52% of the dwelling fires in the same period. Pity they don't further breakdown / analyse the cause of the electrical distribution fires which obviously includes the DNO equipment

It seems to be with the new amendment acceptable to contain a fire which IMO could pose a greater risk by it not being detected early than to actually review why the numbers of fires have increased so dramatically over the last few years.

Using the LFB stats it could be argued that the number of consumer unit fires is 11 times greater now than 6 years ago, 5 times greater now than 5 years ago and 3.5 times greater now than 4 years ago, so should the IET be looking a little closer to home as it would appear that this has all happened under the 17th edition regs couple this with Part P increasing the safety of electrical work in the domestic sector and the perceived skills shortage that was addressed with 17 day and 5 week courses it really does give food for thought as to whether anybody has actually looked at the bigger picture

The last 5 - 6 years has probably seen the highest number of consumer unit swap outs due to not being "compliant" with the 17th edition since electricity came into general use given the factors highlighted previously is it any wonder why this is happening statistics can have a use but are generally flawed by a lack of analysis or swayed by those producing them and can provoke knee jerk reactions that don't actually address the cause as appears to be the case with this change.

The "eg metal" has been jumped on to prempt wholesale change to metal consumer units without looking at whether any of the moulded variants comply or could comply with modification are we going back to the days of that rusty consumer unit on the garage wall because metals good plastic is bad.

This issue could have been dealt with by amending the building regs with the type of consumer unit installed or housing containing it based on risk to occupants should a fire occur if it is in the escape route

For info LFB stats
Number of fires

• 2005/06 - 27
• 2006/07 - 28
• 2007/08 - 33
• 2008/09 - 21
• 2009/10 54
• 2010/11 - 73
• 2011/12 - 71
• 2012/13 - 220
• 2013/14 - 253

Statistic's again, .... without ALL of the base information used to compile these statistics being available, those statistics are practically meaningless, no matter who publishes them. Many household fires are put down to electrical faults when factual means of cause are not known.

However, perhaps what even these low level statistic's show, is that there has been a significant increase in household fire's since the inception of the Part P Providers, that were specifically created to improve Safety in the Domestic sector of our industry. Clearly that has not been the case, and if anything actually shows a steep increase in household fires during there time in office (so to speak) So perhaps it's time they took an in depth look at what these providers are actually bringing to the domestic industry?

One things for sure, the increase in household fires has not been the result of installing plastic CU/DB's, they have been around for a very long time now and have had improvements made to the material they are manufactured from along the way to boot. It's rather, down to the quality those installing those CU/DB's, and to the quality of the components within those enclosures...

 

[Midwest]

Just for your information Midwest, the golden age WAS all metal CU/DB's not plastic. The majority 99% or more, of all electrical panels on virtually all of my current and past projects are or have been metal!!

One of the problems with the introduction of all metal domestic CU/DB's in the UK as i see it, is that the majority of these unskilled chancers that abound in there 1000's, are going to make more of a problem using them, than the easy plastic ones. It certainly isn't going to solve any existing problems....

Ohhh someone's tired. Anyhow thought this thread was about the spankey new metal Hager consumer unit, not another wot a lot pants reg. 421.1.201 is.

 

[Essex_]

Statistic's again, .... without ALL of the base information used to compile these statistics being available, those statistics are practically meaningless, no matter who publishes them. Many household fires are put down to electrical faults when factual means of cause are not known.

However, perhaps what even these low level statistic's show, is that there has been a significant increase in household fire's since the inception of the Part P Providers, that were specifically created to improve Safety in the Domestic sector of our industry. Clearly that has not been the case, and if anything actually shows a steep increase in household fires during there time in office (so to speak) So perhaps it's time they took an in depth look at what these providers are actually bringing to the domestic industry?

One things for sure, the increase in household fires has not been the result of installing plastic CU/DB's, they have been around for a very long time now and have had improvements made to the material they are manufactured from along the way to boot. It's rather, down to the quality those installing those CU/DB's, and to the quality of the components within those enclosures...

So that stats are good enough for you to use to slam Part P but not good enough to use for fires caused by electrical faults?

 

[UNG]

Then it becomes a moral thing. We can all do it for the lowest price but where do you draw the line?

Not quite sure what point you are trying to make with the moral thing with most things price is the overriding factor most customers have no idea what Part P is about let alone what edition and amendment of the regs we are working to they just want it to work at the lowest possible cost.

It is difficult to find customers who don't moan about the cost or who shop around and want you to price match the lowest because they know your work I have a few customers who use me who never ask for a quote and just want me to do it and trust me not to rip them off as for them knowing the regs

 

[Essex_]

Some interesting reading here . Looks like electrical distribution accounts for about 10 - 12% of dwelling fires over the last 3 years yet cooking appliances account for 52% of the dwelling fires in the same period. Pity they don't further breakdown / analyse the cause of the electrical distribution fires which obviously includes the DNO equipment

It seems to be with the new amendment acceptable to contain a fire which IMO could pose a greater risk by it not being detected early than to actually review why the numbers of fires have increased so dramatically over the last few years.

Using the LFB stats it could be argued that the number of consumer unit fires is 11 times greater now than 6 years ago, 5 times greater now than 5 years ago and 3.5 times greater now than 4 years ago, so should the IET be looking a little closer to home as it would appear that this has all happened under the 17th edition regs couple this with Part P increasing the safety of electrical work in the domestic sector and the perceived skills shortage that was addressed with 17 day and 5 week courses it really does give food for thought as to whether anybody has actually looked at the bigger picture

The last 5 - 6 years has probably seen the highest number of consumer unit swap outs due to not being "compliant" with the 17th edition since electricity came into general use given the factors highlighted previously is it any wonder why this is happening statistics can have a use but are generally flawed by a lack of analysis or swayed by those producing them and can provoke knee jerk reactions that don't actually address the cause as appears to be the case with this change.

The "eg metal" has been jumped on to prempt wholesale change to metal consumer units without looking at whether any of the moulded variants comply or could comply with modification are we going back to the days of that rusty consumer unit on the garage wall because metals good plastic is bad.

This issue could have been dealt with by amending the building regs with the type of consumer unit installed or housing containing it based on risk to occupants should a fire occur if it is in the escape route

For info LFB stats
Number of fires

• 2005/06 - 27
• 2006/07 - 28
• 2007/08 - 33
• 2008/09 - 21
• 2009/10 54
• 2010/11 - 73
• 2011/12 - 71
• 2012/13 - 220
• 2013/14 - 253

Great post. These stats are alarming. NC DBs ain't going to change anything I suspect though

 

[Engineer54]

So that stats are good enough for you to use to slam Part P but not good enough to use for fires caused by electrical faults?

I don't think you have the slightest idea about statistics, how they are made or how they can be manipulated to support either way in any dispute using exactly the same numbers!!

What i have stated is, that as low level as these statistics are, you can make a damn good case for slamming the Scams, but it's a very different matter when determining the cause of household fires when i know for a fact that FB will often miss call a fire as being electrical in nature...

 

[D Skelton]

So that stats are good enough for you to use to slam Part P but not good enough to use for fires caused by electrical faults?

Read his post again.

As for statistics, I have seen an unbiased and broken down set straight from the horses mouth. Put it this way, we have seen a ten fold increase in house fires caused by faulty wiring since the inception of Part Pee. The numbers are as clear as day, unfortunately however, we have the scams which will do everything in their power to justify their own existence. They blame it on the materials, they've even gone as far as to convince the LFB that the materials are to blame. They know full well though that it's their members to blame. You won't catch them admitting that though!

 

[Essex_]

I don't think you have the slightest idea about statistics, how they are made or how they can be manipulated to support either way in any dispute using exactly the same numbers!!

What i have stated is, that as low level as these statistics are, you can make a damn good case for slamming the Scams, but it's a very different matter when determining the cause of household fires when i know for a fact that FB will often miss call a fire as being electrical in nature...

I agree with your first comment completely.

 

[UNG]

So that stats are good enough for you to use to slam Part P but not good enough to use for fires caused by electrical faults?

Not entirely sure what you are getting at there is a significant rise in the number of electrical distribution fires in recent years, the introduction of Part P which led to the quick training endorsed by the incompetent persons scams and the 17th edition regulation change are all significant factors in that time period.

Please enlighten us as to what you attribute this rise in electrical distribution fires to


Struggling to find any national stats that show electrical distribution fires pre 2008 although the 2008 stats in the link I posted earlier do have a comparison to the 2007 stats

 

[Essex_]

Read his post again.

As for statistics, I have seen an unbiased and broken down set straight from the horses mouth. Put it this way, we have seen a ten fold increase in house fires caused by faulty wiring since the inception of Part Pee. The numbers are as clear as day, unfortunately however, we have the scams which will do everything in their power to justify their own existence. They blame it on the materials, they've even gone as far as to convince the LFB that the materials are to blame. They know full well though that it's their members to blame. You won't catch them admitting that though!

I agree with you.

 

[Engineer54]

Not entirely sure what you are getting at there is a significant rise in the number of electrical distribution fires in recent years, the introduction of Part P which led to the quick training endorsed by the incompetent persons scams and the 17th edition regulation change are all significant factors in that time period.

Please enlighten us as to what you attribute this rise in electrical distribution fires to


Struggling to find any national stats that show electrical distribution fires pre 2008 although the 2008 stats in the link I posted earlier do have a comparison to the 2007 stats

I'm suggesting that this is the major cause of the rise in electrical distribution fires, and has little to do with plastic enclosure CU's....

 

[Essex_]

Not entirely sure what you are getting at there is a significant rise in the number of electrical distribution fires in recent years, the introduction of Part P which led to the quick training endorsed by the incompetent persons scams and the 17th edition regulation change are all significant factors in that time period.

Please enlighten us as to what you attribute this rise in electrical distribution fires to


Struggling to find any national stats that show electrical distribution fires pre 2008 although the 2008 stats in the link I posted earlier do have a comparison to the 2007 stats

You may have misunderstood me. I am not disputing the figures at all. And I agree with your reasoning. My point with that post was that E54 in the first paragraph said the figures are BS and then in the second paragraph used the same figures to slam Part P.

I fully believe that lack of checks and short courses are to blame for these fires. For me the only way to change this would be a license approach. If people could loose the right to work within their trade standard would improve. But that debate is not for this thread.

 

[Essex_]

I'm suggesting that this is the major cause of the rise in electrical distribution fires, and has little to do with plastic enclosure CU's....

Part P is not the problem. The lack of proper checks to ensure compliance is the problem I think.

 

[D Skelton]

Part P is not the problem. The lack of proper checks to ensure compliance is the problem I think.

No, the admittance of 5 day wonders on to the schemes registers is the problem!