Alterations on old rewireable consumer unit

[fall-apart-dave]

Yes we all make mistakes when posting at daft o'clock, mine was in somehow writing 43.5A when it should have been 41.4A.

I didn't bother checking your figures, I just looked at the point you were making. No hard feelings

 

[DPG]

Yes we all make mistakes when posting at daft o'clock, mine was in somehow writing 43.5A when it should have been 41.4A.

And you would have been the first to start slagging someone off if they had done this very thing. Daz

 

[timo1]

if its just a couple of sockets and rcd spur would comply wouldn't it?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

The biggest problem that I see here, is that we don't actually know whether these sockets require RCD protection.
It could be that the sockets are for individual items of equipment?

 

[DPG]

It's a domestic, so they do need RCD protection. Daz

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Has that changed in the 3rd amendment then?
My understanding was that they were not going to change that.

 

[DPG]

Can risk assess them out ('proper' risk assessment) for commercial, not domestic. Daz

 

[telectrix]

Can risk assess them out ('proper' risk assessment) for commercial, not domestic. Daz

that relates to " under the control of a skilled or instructed person". a labelled socket for a specific piece of equipment is a different kettle of smelly fish.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I still haven't got round to purchasing a copy of the BYB, but my understanding is that there was to be no change to the exemption from requiring RCD protection for sockets intended for specific items of equipment.

 

[telectrix]

I still haven't got round to purchasing a copy of the BYB, but my understanding is that there was to be no change to the exemption from requiring RCD protection for sockets intended for specific items of equipment.

my understanding is the same.