No cpc to lighting circuit, no rcd protection 50 year old wiring

[westward10]

I am going to reassign room designations for the duration of the works.

 

[Wilko]

Done your RA?

 

[HandySparks]

I am going to reassign room designations for the duration of the works.

Guess you could reassign the bath as an extra large bidet.

 

[westward10]

Done your RA?

View attachment 38238

You been in my loft.

 

[westward10]

Guess you could reassign the bath as an extra large bidet.

Hung an old wash board over the side, a bar of carbolic at the end.

 

[Des 56]

The comments box states lighting requires cpc
The test schedule begs to differ

 

[Midwest]

Of course the other issue that normally impacts on domestic wiring/installations that's over 50 years old, is that its been attacked by weekend warriors or DIY'ers for the last 50 years. This normally manifest itself in RFC's being chopped up, with hidden jb's aplenty, connector strips at lighting points with hot lamps frying the cables and various faceplate changes ruining cable ends, especially in kitchens which have been replaced three times over, etc, etc.

Now if you could get the electrical equivalent of a short back & sides, to tidy things up, then perhaps? I've seen a few house purchases, where the new owner has spent thousands on new bathrooms & kitchens, replaced an ageing boiler and associated furred up pipes, but don't seem to want do the obvious thing of sorting out the impending doom below the floorboards.

A IR test might suggest things are hunky dory, but a rewire often reveals the whole sorry state of things. If I was to buy an old'ish house, I'd set aside some money to rewire, not matter what some meter told me.

 

[The Ghost]

The comments box states lighting requires cpc
The test schedule begs to differ

Excuse my ignorance but why do you say that?

 

[westward10]

Excuse my ignorance but why do you say that?

The schedule indicates a 1.0 cpc but the IR and Zs readings are omitted or overwritten as N/A. So I assume the circuits predominantly do not have cpcs even though there is one at the CU?

 

[The Ghost]

1.0 cpc

Ah right! Doh! You know I was looking and looking to find what that comment meant and missed it. Oh dear! I am so glad I threw it out to you lot.

 

[Wilko]

The schedule indicates a 1.0 cpc but the IR and Zs readings are omitted or overwritten as N/A. So I assume the circuits predominantly do not have cpcs even though there is one at the CU?

Hopefully indicates cpc present and correct at CU but cut back at light point