Light circuit with no earth

[Nijinski001]

Is a lighting circuit with no earth anywhere deemed legal?

I have a house where there is an entire lighting circuit with no earth connection apparent anywhere. Apart from re-wiring the whole circuit which is not practical at this stage what would your advice be?

Some of the circuit is wired in two core (P/N) with no earth wire available so I can't even etend any CPC that is cut off.

 

[Adam_151]

Do an insulation resistance test to see if the cable is safe (as opposed to breaking down insulation), if its ok, then use class 2 luminaires only, same for switches, and fasten these into the backboxes with nylon screws

 

[Spark123]

Is a lighting circuit with no earth anywhere deemed legal?

The iee regulations today allow double insulation as a form of protection against indirect contact where the installation is required to be supervised to the extent that if an item is replaced it should not be replaced with an item which impairs protection by double insulation.

 

[Nijinski001]

Thanks for that guys now lets get practical.

Mr A owns said house.
Mr B then buys said house from Mr A unaware that the lighting circuit isn't earthed and has no reason to check it. A number of scenarios could occur
- Mr B decides to fit chrome switches and being unaware of a main earth, uses the eathing wire in the T/E switch wire to earth his switch casing.
- Mr B buys a class 1 light fitting using the earth wire from the old ceiling rose fitting he believes to be active as the eathing point.
- Mr B buys a class 1 standard lamp and wires the plug with an earth assuming this is sufficient.
etc etc

What are the legal implications of Mr B getting electrocuted and what are the practical suggestions other than re-wiring?

 

[pdcelec]

Mr B would be at fault for not doing the job correctly and dabbling in things he knows nothing about

 

[Nijinski001]

PDC - Are you forgetting that Mr B has bought the house in good faith and is after all just fitting a lamp or changing a switch cover?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Mr B then buys said house from Mr A unaware that the lighting circuit isn't earthed and has no reason to check it. A number of scenarios could occur
- Mr B decides to fit chrome switches and being unaware of a main earth, uses the eathing wire in the T/E switch wire to earth his switch casing.

Then Mr B is at fault for not verifying the continuity of the cpc on the circuit as he is supposed to.

- Mr B buys a class 1 light fitting using the earth wire from the old ceiling rose fitting he believes to be active as the eathing point.

Then Mr B is at fault for not verifying the continuity of the cpc on the circuit as he is supposed to.

- Mr B buys a class 1 standard lamp and wires the plug with an earth assuming this is sufficient.

Then Mr B had better hope that nothing goes wrong with his standard lamp.

What are the legal implications of Mr B getting electrocuted

Depends on whether it can be shown that somebody worked on the circuits in question at a time when they should have provided a cpc.

and what are the practical suggestions other than re-wiring?

Do an insulation resistance test to see if the cable is safe (as opposed to breaking down insulation), if its ok, then use class 2 luminaires only, same for switches, and fasten these into the backboxes with nylon screws.

 

[pdcelec]

PDC - Are you forgetting that Mr B has bought the house in good faith and is after all just fitting a lamp or changing a switch cover?

Mr B may have bought it in good faith but without a PIR. Would you buy a car in good faith without an MOT?

If you changed your headlamp bulb on your car and the car set alight because the petrol line was damaged would that be the fault of the seller?

 

[ebee]

B A S said it.;
He is corrrect.
Sadly Part P does not really cover some of this.
If it did it might just be worthwhile.

 

[Nijinski001]

Thanks ebee.

I disagree with BAS. How many people do you know that check continuity of the CPC when they change a light fitting?
How many people would know how to?
How many people would even know what it was?

There also seems to be some confusion that MrB is doing work that he shouldn't. As I said, in theory someone could be doing something as simple as changing a standard brass or chrome light fitting not knowing that the earth connection is next to uselss.

How many non-electricians are buying houses in good faith believing that the circuits are sound?
How many people have a PIR done when they buy a house unless a surveyor gives an indication for concern?

The final rhetorical question for me is how many houses are out there with lighting circuits containing no CPC because someone mistakenly believed that a lighting circuit didn't need one?

I say bring on the sellers pack.

 

[Jaymack]

I was called to give a quote for replacing two ceiling fittings with metal fittings and some other work. Gave the quote with the proviso that the lighting system was earthed, one of the existing fittings was wood and the other metal, I subsequently found there was no earth. Agreed with the owner to just install replacement pendants, as he couldn't afford to rewire. As a "by the way" statement, he said that he was getting shocks from the kitchen lighting switch, I checked this today and the fixing screws are live, the floor is earthenware tiles. I have removed the fixing screws as an interim measure and advised the owner. The lighting switch is firmly held in position with tile grouting from a bad tiling job. I will now have to break out this switch and find the reason for the metal box being live and rectify. I could have just replaced the metal screws with plastic ones but this is potentially dangerous. What surprises me, is that this householder didn't appreciate the risk of electrocution. There must be many other conditions similar to this, just waiting for the accident to happen.
Jaymack

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I disagree with BAS. How many people do you know that check continuity of the CPC when they change a light fitting?

I think an electrician would. A DIYer has no dispensation to work to lower standards, and if he does, he does so at his own risk.

How many people would know how to?

That's not the point. Ignorance is no excuse. A DIYer has no dispensation to work to lower standards than a professional.

How many people would even know what it was?

That's not the point. Ignorance is no excuse. A DIYer has no dispensation to work to lower standards than a professional.

There also seems to be some confusion that MrB is doing work that he shouldn't.

No - he's not doing work that he shouldn't, he's just not doing it to the required standards.

As I said, in theory someone could be doing something as simple as changing a standard brass or chrome light fitting not knowing that the earth connection is next to uselss.

Yes, he could, but that's because he's not doing it properly. A DIYer has no dispensation to work to lower standards than a professional.

How many non-electricians are buying houses in good faith believing that the circuits are sound?

Millions.

How many people have a PIR done when they buy a house unless a surveyor gives an indication for concern?

Hardly any, would be my guess.

The final rhetorical question for me is how many houses are out there with lighting circuits containing no CPC because someone mistakenly believed that a lighting circuit didn't need one?

No idea. Do you mean "mistakenly believed that a lighting circuit didn't need one" as in old lighting circuits, installed according to the regulations at the time, which mistakenly allowed them to be done without a cpc, or do you mean recent rewires?

I say bring on the sellers pack.

Ha!

Firstly, it looks like a PIR will not be part of that, just a "visual inspection report".

Secondly, the whole thing is looking flaky. I can't find an "official" website with this on, but this is what someone recently posted on the Screwfix forum:

"Well I spoke to the ODPM again earlier and asked what the Position was on the Home Information Pack and what form it would take upon launch, this is the reply I got."

Quote:
"Initially, and until July of 05, it was the intention to introduce a requirement to produce, as part of the pack, a CORGI test certificate for the gas services to the home, and an NICEIC or equivalent for the electrical installation within the home. For expediency, these requirements were left out of the trial carried out in Bristol, where the scheme has met a muted and somewhat fractured response.

The ODPM would still like to make these mandatory requirements as we feel that without them, the pack loses a major part of its impact and these are vital to a full and overall picture of the state of the property for any prospective buyer, however the Minister feels that this would introduce too undue a burden on the home seller and it could be seen as a form of tax on sellers. many estate agents used in the Bristol trial and as part of the overall revue and consultation procedure also feel that the financial burden of this as a mandatory feature could harm the housing market.

The team feel that it is vital and we are pressing for them to remain a mandatory requirement, however it does appear that a compromise of some description may have to be reached on this with the licenced housing Inspectors undertaking mandatory Visual Inspections of the Gas, Electrical and plumbing within a home, and should they state a further and fuller inspection is required, then this will be mandatory, but not so at the initial stage. This would mean that the Inspector, happy with the condition of these services visually, may not need to make any recommendations and thus avoid undue expense to the home seller."

"So it would appear from this conversation that the water is still muddy. The Government, ever trying to keep the public happy and avoid the anything being seen as a tax, are trying to water it down and basically make it meaningless, whilst the consultation team appear determined to press for the full scheme as originally proposed...so we are back to square one..no-one appears to know what the legislation will demand of us!!!!"

It's also worth reading this: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmodpm/751-ii/751w26.htm which is fairly long, but very interesting, particularly the part about how in order to create the necessary numbers of "qualified" House Inspectors they have proposed an accelerated training programme open to "other professional groups and new entrants", i.e. not just properly qualified residential surveyors.

Now where have I heard something similar before??

Finally, if you've not lost the will to live, a view of what it's really going to cost - apparently there is some doubt about the figures in the ODPM's RIA. (Now where have I heard something similar before??)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmodpm/751/751w15.htm