Advice on old style junction box for cooker - need to replace cooker, told box illegal?

[ipf]

I know...and it's not good.......but it's not plastered in the wall. How long ago was it done, was it a good connection and how long has it lasted? 25 years ago, I'd have used through crimps....so what?
What's wrong with ply....compared with timber and plasterboard?

Thing is, nobody knows do they. If I got some 'arching or sparking', where could it be happening, that's the issue with all these joints when there's a problem, like countless threads we've had here.[/QUOTE]
I know what you're saying but that's how things were done then. If it was done DIY there would be more chance of problems than if it was by someone who knew their job.
You've come across it. Would you say it's a bad connection? No access, I know, but there was no regulation insisting upon it.
Current requirements take into account (much more) for the interference of the lesser qualified or, to some extent, the non qualified. Hence, I feel, the market for upgraded methods of connection has risen.
A generation before that you could have found porcelain 'screwits' on vir, which I personally hate....but methods evolve.

 

[Midwest]

I'm not sure that type of connection would ever been seen as acceptable?

Edit; not the joint, but the concealing of?

 

[ipf]

I'm not sure that type of connection would ever been seen as acceptable?

Edit; not the joint, but the concealing of?

Why? A very high percentage of joints in houses were, at one time, inaccessible.....and not against regulations.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Why? A very high percentage of joints in houses were, at one time, inaccessible.....and not against regulations.

I would disagree with that.
Perhaps you could inform us which edition of the Regulations allowed connections to be inaccessible?

 

[Katoli]

Thanks everyone for all the advice and comments. And an especially big thank you to Telectrix who has found me an electrician! Happy Days!

 

[Spoon]

This is the current connection (no pun intended lol) which has been in place since before I bought this property 26 years ago. I had a new cooker delivered from a major high street retailer and they said they could not install it because the setting was "illegal". Is it worth my ordering a cooker with install from a different major retailer and see if they'll just install the cooker, or am I just going to come up against the same "illegal" issue?

Hi OP. As you have already been told, the only issue is with the dangling cable. Get some white plastic mini trunking and fix it to the wall for the cable going to the new cooker, when you get it. Best to fix it properly rather than use adhesive alone as the heat will affect the adhesive.
If the new cooker people say it's 'illegal' again just ask "What part of BS 7671 does it not comply with?" Ask to see the actual print in the Big Yellow Book. That should stop the muppets in their tracks... If they try and BS you tell them that you will question their comments on an electrical forum, and you will state company name and installer name... See what they say then.

 

[Midwest]

Why? A very high percentage of joints in houses were, at one time, inaccessible.....and not against regulations.

Something concealed in a JB in a ceiling void is inaccessible, but common practise for some years, I concede that. A joint in a wall, done in connectors, covered in ply, plastered & tiled over, is a whole different concept IMO

 

[Midwest]

Hi OP. As you have already been told, the only issue is with the dangling cable. Get some white plastic mini trunking and fix it to the wall for the cable going to the new cooker, when you get it. Best to fix it properly rather than use adhesive alone as the heat will affect the adhesive.
If the new cooker people say it's 'illegal' again just ask "What part of BS 7671 does it not comply with?" Ask to see the actual print in the Big Yellow Book. That should stop the muppets in their tracks... If they try and BS you tell them that you will question their comments on an electrical forum, and you will state company name and installer name... See what they say then.

I know me & ipf, have taken it a bit off topic, but that's the sixth same suggestion on cable restraint & mini trunking. Just saying

 

[Spoon]

I know me & ipf, have taken it a bit off topic, but that's the sixth same suggestion on cable restraint & mini trunking. Just saying

Very true mate but the OP stated the same thing on his second post so I thought I would give my full opinion.
We are really trying to brain-wash him into knowing its not "illegal" really...

 

[ipf]

I would disagree with that.
Perhaps you could inform us which edition of the Regulations allowed connections to be inaccessible?

Just found an old 14th...B.73....joints for non flex cables shall be accessible for inspection, not applying to cables buried underground or enclosed in building materials....so certainly not in all situations.