Alterations on old rewireable consumer unit

[GMES]

Those are the reasons I don't touch Domestic except for Ind/com Clients. Domestic customers seem to have a very perculiar way of thinking and for me their priorities are always cock eyed.

 

[fall-apart-dave]

Those are the reasons I don't touch Domestic except for Ind/com Clients. Domestic customers seem to have a very perculiar way of thinking and for me their priorities are always cock eyed.

Thats what I will miss about holding a senior position on the ships when managing a mobilisation. Picking up the phone and saying "You want it to do what? Right you need this, this and this, it will take this long, no I can't use whats already there. Okaythanksbai!" and what you say needs done, gets done.

 

[Andy78]

Thats what I will miss about holding a senior position on the ships when managing a mobilisation. Picking up the phone and saying "You want it to do what? Right you need this, this and this, it will take this long, no I can't use whats already there. Okaythanksbai!" and what you say needs done, gets done.

That doesn't need to change with domestic customers. I like to think I'm quite friendly and approachable, but I'm very firm about the way things must be done for me to put my name to them. A firm approach also can help stop the "while you're here" jobs from mounting up.

 

[Octopus]

Davesparks - would that be a lollipop circuit (single leg out to RCD, where it splits to a ring)? I've heard the term bantered about but haven't come across it.

Yes.

Often found in a kitchen where the "old" cooker circuit has been adapted to add sockets..... not in BS7671 or the OSG or the GN's but a perfectly sound way to adapt a circuit if you utilise basic design principles.... How you document it on the forms is up for debate BUT at the very least a comment in the notes ...

 

[sparksburnout]

In my experience, the majority of people will shell out to have it done properly, but I live in quite an affluent area so maybe not representative generally. I guess it also depends on how hard up for work you are, but the best attitude to have really, is if they won't pay out to do it right, walk away. GMES is right, all this faffing around bodging up separate RCD units for just one circuit, just change the sodding board out.

 

[Andy78]

In my experience, the majority of people will shell out to have it done properly, but I live in quite an affluent area so maybe not representative generally. I guess it also depends on how hard up for work you are, but the best attitude to have really, is if they won't pay out to do it right, walk away. GMES is right, all this faffing around bodging up separate RCD units for just one circuit, just change the sodding board out.

I would not say that adding single circuit RCD protection for alterations is "not doing it right." Changing the DB could easily double or treble the cost of a small job.
I always offer a choice mainly to steer myself away from the misleading iteration that the DB needs to be changed to facilitate alterations. I point out the obvious benefits of a DB upgrade but will quite happily carry out work another way if so desired and also consider it "done properly".

 

[davesparks]

Davesparks - would that be a lollipop circuit (single leg out to RCD, where it splits to a ring)? I've heard the term bantered about but haven't come across it.

In my opinion no it wouldn't be a lollipop circuit. I wouldn't consider the few inches of cable between the CU and the enclosure containing the RCD to be a significant part of the circuit (although it should still be tested.

The most common implementation of the lollipop circuit I have come across is in a local college. For most of the classrooms a 32A circuit in 6mm cable runs from the DB to a 45A DP isolator in the classroom then a 2.5mm ring runs from the outgoing side of the isolator to feed all sockets in the room.

 

[sparksburnout]

I would not say that adding single circuit RCD protection for alterations is "not doing it right." Changing the DB could easily double or treble the cost of a small job.
I always offer a choice mainly to steer myself away from the misleading iteration that the DB needs to be changed to facilitate alterations. I point out the obvious benefits of a DB upgrade but will quite happily carry out work another way if so desired and also consider it "done properly".

I agree that there is nothing "wrong" with it. Putting in a separate RCD enclosure just to protect the socket circuit would be fine. In practice though, there will often be limited room and multiple circuits. Sure it would probably double or treble the cost, but as has been said, the client will happily spend 5 or 10 times the cost on a new telly or a personalised number plate for the BM without batting an eyelid, and my approach would always be to go for the global approach as well. How do these same customers deal with a boiler that needs replacing??

 

[Hellmooth]

Yes Dad. Sorry Dad. Won't do it again Dad. As for "real world" it's a far cry from discussing something at daft o'clock when I'm not giving it my full attention now, isn't it..? Annnd I didn't, at any point, say "yeah sure 43.5 amps is fine on 2.5, crack on!", I simply got my wires crossed (wahey! See what I did there..?) and realjsed afterwards and even said sorry (lord knows why!) when you pointed it out. Still, I'm sure the op is finding all this very useful, but lets not stopp to dressing folk down and giving out spankings, that'll make us all look like petty kids in a playground trying to get one up on one another.

Ahhhh so you've met Davesparks............better get used to it lol!

I think you'll do just fine in your chosen career.

 

[davesparks]

Yes Dad. Sorry Dad. Won't do it again Dad. As for "real world" it's a far cry from discussing something at daft o'clock when I'm not giving it my full attention now, isn't it..? Annnd I didn't, at any point, say "yeah sure 43.5 amps is fine on 2.5, crack on!", I simply got my wires crossed (wahey! See what I did there..?) and realjsed afterwards and even said sorry (lord knows why!) when you pointed it out. Still, I'm sure the op is finding all this very useful, but lets not stopp to dressing folk down and giving out spankings, that'll make us all look like petty kids in a playground trying to get one up on one another.

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.

 

[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.