UK New timed fan isolator and switch... but lighting circuit is via

[Christophyfryfle]

It was stuck on, previous tenant from previous owner snapped the pull cord and didn't tell the landlord. LL only found out about it when the estate agent went round for photos. The fan had been stuck on permanently and the motor was a bit whiffy, but when I moved in the cord had gone and the fan was off the wall. I was told about this prior to completion; this all happened in the last few weeks when the tenant was moving out. I got a little reduction in price out of it. Since I was going to renovate the bathroom anyway it didn't seem like that big a deal. Tak the old gubbins out, pop a new one in, bish bash bosh. Alas...

 

[Christophyfryfle]

Yeah - Quickwire have their place, this is one situation where they are a bit of a pain.
Space will be the deciding factor here.
This just needs a T+E from loop out to the isolator and a 1 core for switched live.
In my install the loop out went to the next light hence the need for an extra grey multi-way quickwire...

(As a matter of academic interest I've just opened a Quickwire up with two small flatbladed screwdrivers, so it can be done without their little tool, just needs care.)

 

[Christophyfryfle]

Simple replacement of an old noisy fan. Should have been rip the old one out, put the new one in. Only change is the new fan has a timer overrun which was chosen due to the old tenants leaving it in for so long it eventually went bust. The old fan didn't have a timer.

Anyway... I've got the new fan and isolator in place, went to replace the twin core with 3 core... and that is when I found the rose was replaced with Quickwire a few years ago. I've been given a few (bit Heath Robinson) solutions of sorts on one forum, which if it wasn't in a Part P location would be fine, but mmmm not sure about bathrooms. And on another electrician forum on Reddit, I only got sarcastic comments back, and one solution that would definitely fail inspection. So third time lucky.

Has anyone come up with a solution to this that would be acceptable in regards to Part P? Short summary: 3 core and earth from isolator switch to Quickwire, which is only twin core. Thanks in advance!

All sorted, thanks to Quickwire who provided a diagram for this exact scenario in a Part P location. If you're registered with ECA, NICEIC and/or ELECSA, this is their Approved Method.

 

[timhoward]

Interesting. Funnily enough their solution is basically the same idea.
I was advocating a 1 core + Earth from light fitting to isolator.
Their solution is using another quickwire splitter on the load side and running a 2 core T+E to isolator, then cutting the one that isn't needed, basically making it a 1-core + Earth again!

That said their solution has some benefits:
-It's probably cheaper to get the quickwire splitter and use T+E that you probably already have rather than acquiring a reel of rarely needed 1 core and earth .
-their solution has the advantage that if you can't get another cable into the light fitting the joint can be external.
-it allows more fun playing with another quickwire!

As a note to anyone else finding this thread in future, both their way and my way has an extra gotcha if the light fitting isn't the last one on the circuit. It's probably easiest to journey to wago-land then, or do it as per my original answer in this thread.

 

[Mike Johnson]

Will have to try the Quickwire's at some point, their solution looks very neat and easy to implement.

 

[Soi disant]

a Part P location.

So that will be anywhere on the consumer’s side of the electricity supply meter and
(a) in or attached to a dwelling;
(b) in the common parts of a building serving one or more dwellings, but excluding power supplies to lifts;
(c) in a building that receives its electricity from a source located within or shared with a dwelling; or
(d) in a garden or in or on land associated with a building where the electricity is from a source located within or shared with a dwelling.

If you're registered with ECA, NICEIC and/or ELECSA, this is their Approved Method.

Are members of those schemes not allowed to think for themselves?

 

[Christophyfryfle]

So that will be anywhere on the consumer’s side of the electricity supply meter and
(a) in or attached to a dwelling;
(b) in the common parts of a building serving one or more dwellings, but excluding power supplies to lifts;
(c) in a building that receives its electricity from a source located within or shared with a dwelling; or
(d) in a garden or in or on land associated with a building where the electricity is from a source located within or shared with a dwelling.



Are members of those schemes not allowed to think for themselves?

I was given various options via the forum - some of which the manufacturers have confirmed, are NOT Part P compliant (they tried various solutions and the only one that was signed off was the one shown in the diagram). On that basis I assume anything other than that, would fail a (properly carried out) inspection. In any case, as we had drummed into us in our course... ALWAYS FOLLOW THE MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS.

I would never suggest using a different method to one that has been approved for Part P, and I would never ever recommend ignoring the manufacturer's instructions.

 

[UNG]

But I would recommend Quickwire all day long. The time it saves... They do a starter kit - two splitters, two switch&loads, the wire stripping tool and the tool to take wires back out. Practise till you can do all four in a minute..then put it all away, get an old ceiling rose, four pieces of uncut cable, and time yourself. It is revelatory...

So you take the very simple addition of an over run timer fan and a fan isolator you ask 3 forums then Quickwire and you finally get a solution, using Wago's the job could have been done days ago such a time revelation
I've looked at the Quickwire system a few times and I'm not that keen on how restrictive they are they have a 4 cable model but have never adapted it to a multiple cable model for more flexibility, the current add another splitter christmas tree effect multiplies the potential points of failure in a circuit and also I don't think they are at the right price point yet so to carry a stock of them when you are not doing lighting everyday is a lot of dead cash
I think I'll stick to my box of Wago's and Wagoboxes that are a lot more adaptable to problems like this one and cover more cable sizes

 

[Christophyfryfle]

So you take the very simple addition of an over run timer fan and a fan isolator you ask 3 forums then Quickwire and you finally get a solution, using Wago's the job could have been done days ago such a time revelation
I've looked at the Quickwire system a few times and I'm not that keen on how restrictive they are they have a 4 cable model but have never adapted it to a multiple cable model for more flexibility, the current add another splitter christmas tree effect multiplies the potential points of failure in a circuit and also I don't think they are at the right price point yet so to carry a stock of them when you are not doing lighting everyday is a lot of dead cash
I think I'll stick to my box of Wago's and Wagoboxes that are a lot more adaptable to problems like this one and cover more cable sizes

Well, the Quickwire was already in place and I've yet to see the logic of ripping out one system to incorporate another that ostensibly does the same thing. Unnecessary work in my opinion. Still, all done (and with that diagram, took me less than fifteen minutes to do the whole thing). Happy days...

 

[Soi disant]

I was given various options via the forum - some of which the manufacturers have confirmed, are NOT Part P compliant

You were given various options here, some of which the manufacturers have confirmed did not make reasonable provision in the design and installation of electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installations from fire or injury?

(they tried various solutions and the only one that was signed off was the one shown in the diagram).

"Signed off" by who?

I would never suggest using a different method to one that has been approved for Part P

"Approved" by who? Under what approval regime?


Sorry, Christo, but we seem to be going down a rabbit hole of misconceptions and old wives tales here....