AFDD, Building Regs and Insurance

[AndoRegs]

Hello all.
New here so i may get flamed if this is covered somewhere else, but I've been scouring google for ages without any conclusions.
I'm of the understanding now that AFDDs need to be installed in certain locations, sleeping accommodation being the one I'm interested in as it constitutes a bedroom.
Now if an electrician has not fitted Arc fault protection to that circuit and somewhere along the line an arc fault occurs, causes a fire and results in the damage or loss of property or properties; will home insurance pay out or will they simply say as the "recommended only" AFDD implementation as stated in the 18th Edition wasn't carried out, they won't pay out?
I'm trying to gauge how we should be going forward as I'd always cover myself so i would install Arc protection however, I've already heard of electricians from around London area ignoring AFDD recommendations and simply installing to 3rd Amend. 17th edition this month, without any information of the AFDD to the customer.
Any help on this very welcome!!

 

[SparkyChick]

Personally, if someone asks me to replace their consumer unit or add a circuit, I'm going to price two options... one with AFDDs and one without, provide some guidance to the consumer and leave it to them, making sure I have a paper trail of them refusing the ridiculously priced AFDD version.

You've then carried out your obligations under BS 7671 because at the moment, they are only recommended (which you have done, and the customer has declined).

 

[AndoRegs]

Thanks for the reply SparkyChick.
So for all intensive purposes if we quoted both AFDD and 17th Edition. The customer decides on the cheaper option with written documentation refusing the need for AFDD and any fault that occurs from arcing is therefore on his/her head?
I agree the AFDDs are so overpriced, just for two it lumbered up a quoted job for me, but being unsure about who the blame lies with if a fault did occur after work completed. I can only explain to potential customers about the regulation changes.

 

[buzzlightyear]

So for all intensive purposes if we quoted both AFDD and 17th Edition.

now 18 th edition .

 

[AndoRegs]

now 18 th edition .

Sorry, late typo.

 

[buzzlightyear]

Sorry, late typo

that's ok ,I'm the worst offender on this site .with spelling mistakes, half man half rhino.

 

[SparkyChick]

Thanks for the reply SparkyChick.
So for all intensive purposes if we quoted both AFDD and 17th Edition. The customer decides on the cheaper option with written documentation refusing the need for AFDD and any fault that occurs from arcing is therefore on his/her head?
I agree the AFDDs are so overpriced, just for two it lumbered up a quoted job for me, but being unsure about who the blame lies with if a fault did occur after work completed. I can only explain to potential customers about the regulation changes.

I'm not a lawyer and I can't say whether what I'm planning on doing would hold water in a court of law in terms of pushing the blame on to a client in the event something bad happens.

That's how I'm planning on approaching it, I would say you do so at your own risk.

 

[Wilko]

Hi - my read of 421.1.7 is that AFDD are a recommendation for areas with high fire risk or high impact if there was a fire. But even in those locations it's not a requirement to have AFDD for compliance with BBB. Maybe I've misunderstood (?).
If the Customer (or their insurers) want them installed, that's just fine.

 

[buzzlightyear]

A new Regulation 421.1.7 has been introduced recommending the installation of arc fault detection devices (AFDDs) to mitigate the risk of fire in AC final circuits of a fixed installation due to the effects of arc fault currents.

 

[AndoRegs]

Hi - my read of 421.1.7 is that AFDD are a recommendation for areas with high fire risk or high impact if there was a fire. But even in those locations it's not a requirement to have AFDD for compliance with BBB. Maybe I've misunderstood (?).
If the Customer (or their insurers) want them installed, that's just fine.

I grabbed this from the regs page buddy. But under definition of "sleeping accommodation"... A bedroom.

But it also says a location of irreplaceable goods ...which technically is anyones home belongings surely.
Such grey areas.

The 18th Edition now recommends the installation of Arc Fault Detection Devices (AFDDs) to mitigate the risk of fire in final circuits of a fixed installation due to the effect of arc fault currents. The 18th Edition gives examples of where such devices can be used as follows:

1. premises with sleeping accommodation;
2. locations with a risk of fire due to the nature of processed or stored materials, i.e. BE2 locations (e.g. barns, woodworking shops, stores of combustible materials);
3. locations with combustible constructional materials, i.e. CA2 locations (e.g. wooden buildings);
4. fire propagating structures, i.e. CB2 locations; and
5. locations with endangering of irreplaceable goods.

 

[AndoRegs]

I'm not a lawyer and I can't say whether what I'm planning on doing would hold water in a court of law in terms of pushing the blame on to a client in the event something bad happens.

That's how I'm planning on approaching it, I would say you do so at your own risk.

Exactly, because i suppose no matter what, all a customer would have to say is they signed the documentation not knowing what an AFDD was regardless of paoerwork in the worst case scenario.

 

[AndyL]

Thanks for the reply SparkyChick.
So for all intensive purposes if we quoted both AFDD and 17th Edition. The customer decides on the cheaper option with written documentation refusing the need for AFDD and any fault that occurs from arcing is therefore on his/her head?

Although I think you could argue that arc faults, and the damage caused from them, are likely to be the fault of the installer, so it may end up on your head

 

[Pete999]

Although I think you could argue that arc faults, and the damage caused from them, are likely to be the fault of the installer, so it may end up on your head

Probably right there Andy, bad installs, perhaps that's why the IET are pushing along with AFDs?

 

[sparksburnout]

Personally, if someone asks me to replace their consumer unit or add a circuit, I'm going to price two options... one with AFDDs and one without, provide some guidance to the consumer and leave it to them, making sure I have a paper trail of them refusing the ridiculously priced AFDD version.

You've then carried out your obligations under BS 7671 because at the moment, they are only recommended (which you have done, and the customer has declined).

If they want them fitted how are you going to test them??

 

[SparkyChick]

If they want them fitted how are you going to test them??

The only requirement for testing them is, as far as I know, that the test button operates the device. From what I've read, they conduct self tests periodically and if they fail I think they turn the circuit off.

 

[Toneyz]

The only requirement for testing them is, as far as I know, that the test button operates the device. From what I've read, they conduct self tests periodically and if they fail I think they turn the circuit off.

That don't sound right to me I would have thought that the indicator flag changes colour.

 

[Baddegg]

has Anybody actually fitted any yet in a domestic setting? What about adding a new circuit to an older board?

 

[Ian1981]

My interpretation of sleeping accommodation is hotels, HMO’s and the like.
If the regulations meant bedrooms as in homes then it would say dwellings such as the non combustible consumer units makes reference to dwellings only

 

[SparkyChick]

That don't sound right to me I would have thought that the indicator flag changes colour.

I'm not sure what happens if they fail the self test. Whilst I agree, setting the indicator flag is going to be about as useful as a quarterly test notice

 

[sparksburnout]

The only requirement for testing them is, as far as I know, that the test button operates the device. From what I've read, they conduct self tests periodically and if they fail I think they turn the circuit off.

Mmmm. So what do you do then? How do we go about fault finding the circuit involved? Or do we just assume it's knackered and get another one for £205? Don't suppose the 18th course covers the fault finding? That will be another I&T course and exam, no doubt. More £££'s out of pocket!