Fuse box replacement - is it necessary

[mikhailfaradayski]

May I respond in a rational and reasoned way: You are an idiot.

"I being the person responsible for the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing of the electrical installation (as indicated by my signature below), particulars of which are described above, having exercised reasonable skill and care when carrying out the Design, Construction, Inspection & Testing, hereby CERTIFY that the said work for which I have been responsible is to the best of my knowledge and belief in accordance with BS 7671:2008......"

Do you believe that if someone is being paid to do some work, and to give their customer a certificate on which they make that declaration, that the declaration should be true?

Let's not have any more b******s about needing to get a grip, and no more weasel words about "oh but this is the real world", no more "you're an idiot"

It's a very simple question. When a professional electrician makes such a declaration, do you think that he should be telling the truth, YES OR NO?

As we all have heard the 'its not mandatory' 'its only guidance' arguements a thousand times, is it beyond your comprehension that it is possible to create your own declaration, suitably worded so as not to commit a lie to paper.

The forms in the BRB are 'model' forms, they can be adapted, they are not absolute. Have a little think around that for a while!

 

[LoveRocket]

Right Banal, there are several things to note here.

1) Why on earth do you think an electrician would be asking if s/he needed a new "fuse box", and would have had a quote from another electrician? Once again your predilection for insulting strangers overwhelmed any logic, reason or rationality you may (or may not) have.

2) There is no need for an electrician to issue an EIC for moving a socket a few feet, thus the declaration you quote is irrelevant.

3) The overwhelming theme of the regs with regards to alterations is that any work should leave the installation no less safe than it was before. If a non-RCD socket is now a non-RCD socket a few feet away, then it's certainly no less safe. If a spark was to issue a certificate for such a job, they could quite acceptably state such as a deviation.

4) We now enter a strange place for you Banal, a place where morals and common sense come in to play. Say a spark is called to a pensioner's to look at a potentially dangerous problem, the solution (such as a new luminaire in a bathroom), by the letter of the law, requires RCD protection, and realistically a new consumer unit. If the spark was to quote for the full upgrade, the pensioner may well simply ignore the problem due to the perceived price tag - a much more sensible, moral, and safe solution would be for the spark to fix the fault, advise the customer, and leave it as that. BS7671 does not have a chapter on morals and reality, so you may not care about such trivialities.

Put these on your shopping list.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

1) Why on earth do you think an electrician would be asking if s/he needed a new "fuse box", and would have had a quote from another electrician? Once again your predilection for insulting strangers overwhelmed any logic, reason or rationality you may (or may not) have.

Since you're suddenly keen on logic, reason and rationality would you please use those in an explanation of why "If you're a sparks, why do you need to ask this question?" is an insult.

You must have logical, reasonable and rational grounds for believing it is, or you wouldn't have accused me of insulting the OP, would you?

2) There is no need for an electrician to issue an EIC for moving a socket a few feet, thus the declaration you quote is irrelevant.

OK.

I/We CERTIFY that the said works do not impair the safety of the existing installation, that the said works have been designed, constructed, inspected and tested in accordance with BS 7671:2008 (IEE Wiring Regulations), amended to ........................(date) and that the said works, to the best of my/our knowledge and belief, at the time of my/our inspection, complied with BS 7671 except as detailed in Part 1 above.

When a professional electrician makes such a declaration, do you think that he should be telling the truth, YES OR NO?

3) The overwhelming theme of the regs with regards to alterations is that any work should leave the installation no less safe than it was before. If a non-RCD socket is now a non-RCD socket a few feet away, then it's certainly no less safe. If a spark was to issue a certificate for such a job, they could quite acceptably state such as a deviation.

No - to do so would be to falsify the certificate. The requirement in the declaration is absolutely clear and unambiguous - he's signing to say that the work he did complied with the wiring regulations.

120.3 is also absolutely clear - an deviation must not result in the work being less safe than if it had complied. It does not say that it's OK to deviate as long as what you do is as safe as what was already there.

4) We now enter a strange place for you Banal, a place where morals and common sense come in to play. Say a spark is called to a pensioner's to look at a potentially dangerous problem, the solution (such as a new luminaire in a bathroom), by the letter of the law, requires RCD protection, and realistically a new consumer unit. If the spark was to quote for the full upgrade, the pensioner may well simply ignore the problem due to the perceived price tag - a much more sensible, moral, and safe solution would be for the spark to fix the fault, advise the customer, and leave it as that. BS7671 does not have a chapter on morals and reality, so you may not care about such trivialities.

If BS 7671 does not allow deviations for reasons of morals and reality then no matter how much you bluster it remains utterly impossible for an electrician to issue a valid EIC or MWC for work which does not comply.

You may wish that it were otherwise, but it is not, and no amount of wishing on your part will make it otherwise.

And anyway your example doesn't hold water - the regulations don't require an RCD to be added to a bathroom circuit when replacing a broken luminaire.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

LR - you've made at least 2 visits to the forum since I posted.

1) Do you intend to provide a logical, reasonable and rational explanation of why "If you're a sparks, why do you need to ask this question?" is an insult?

Or is your accusation going to be yet another of a seemingly endless stream of ridiculous posts for which which not even you can come up with any justification?


2) I/We CERTIFY that the said works do not impair the safety of the existing installation, that the said works have been designed, constructed, inspected and tested in accordance with BS 7671:2008 (IEE Wiring Regulations), amended to ........................(date) and that the said works, to the best of my/our knowledge and belief, at the time of my/our inspection, complied with BS 7671 except as detailed in Part 1 above.

When a professional electrician makes such a declaration, do you think that he should be telling the truth, YES OR NO?

 

[Adam_151]

120.3 is also absolutely clear - an deviation must not result in the work being less safe than if it had complied. It does not say that it's OK to deviate as long as what you do is as safe as what was already there.e.

So what would be your take on this with regards to the installation of a new class 2 extraction fan in a bathroom where there was not one before where the circuit is not RCD protected?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The same as it has always been - if you are not responsible for the creation of a circuit in the bathroom you are not responsible for ensuring that the existing circuit complies with the regulations which apply to circuits.

You may have to apply RCD protection for any new concealed cables, as per 522.6.7, but if you didn't install the circuit you don't have to comply with 701.411.3.3.

But I know that's not a widely shared view, and the argument has been done to death on this forum in the past, so I'm not going to start it up again here.

I don't see the relevance anyway - whatever your interpretation of any regulation is, if you think that you have to do XYZ to comply, and not doing XYZ is not as safe as doing it, 120.3 makes it quite clear that you can't sign a certificate with it listed as a deviation.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

LR...is your accusation going to be yet another of a seemingly endless stream of ridiculous posts for which which not even you can come up with any justification?

Apparently it is.