Metal enclosure with 3rd amendment.

[JohnW2]

I think you're confusing 'vested interest' with 'conflict of interest'.

In the context were talking about, I would think that the two usually go together - at least, there won't usually be a conflict of interest unless there is a vested interest (even if on behalf of, say, an employer).

Where do you think they might have found an independent expert with sufficient knowledge to add to their discussion?

The world is full of 'experts' and I seriously doubt that one could not have been found. For example, I sometimes work with an organisation which has a whole department full of 'experts' in relation to all aspects of fire hazards and fire investigation.

In any event, as I said, at the very least, it would probably be appropriate to have the report of the LFBs investigation reviewed and assessed by an independent person - as regards methodology and the correctness/ appropriateness/ reliability of conclusions, something which does not necessarily require specific detailed knowledge of the subject area in question. I have provided more than my fair share of such 'independent assessments' over the years!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I wonder if "they" have considered how many fires, or temperature excursion events, will occur that would not have done before when people bring the tails into their metal CU through 2 separate holes?

 

[JohnW2]

I wonder if "they" have considered how many fires, or temperature excursion events, will occur that would not have done before when people bring the tails into their metal CU through 2 separate holes?

Indeed - but who knows what 'they' have, and have not, considered!

I also wonder if they have considered the possible effects in terms of 'life and limb' if/when people (particularly DIYers) start 'playing around' (maybe in the name of testing) inside a live or semi-live (main switch off) earthed metal CU?

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

The world is full of 'experts' and I seriously doubt that one could not have been found.

The world is indeed full of people who consider themselves experts, as a glance at these forums shows. I contend that anyone with sufficient expertise would almost certainly not be truly independent.

 

[JohnW2]

The world is full of 'experts' and I seriously doubt that one could not have been found.

The world is indeed full of people who consider themselves experts, as a glance at these forums shows. I contend that anyone with sufficient expertise would almost certainly not be truly independent.

I was talking about those who really are 'experts', not those who consider themselves to be

Just as with the organisation I mentioned yesterday, there really are plenty of 'independent experts' out there in most fields. Many/most of them will have had, in additional to their qualifications', considerable past experience in industry (or whatever, according to the field) and/or academia, before becoming 'independent consultants', with no 'ties' to anyone/anything. If, as in many (e.g. legal) matters, they are engaged by a client 'on one side' of an argument, then there is some scope for them to be biased in favour of their client's interests. However, if they are merely asked to give an 'objective expert opinion', in the absence of any 'conflict', there is no reason, nor basis, for their being biased in any particular direction.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Nothing wrong with not being independent, as long as you don't allow yourself to have a conflict of interest, and any vested interest you have is fully disclosed.

 

[JohnW2]

Nothing wrong with not being independent, as long as you don't allow yourself to have a conflict of interest, and any vested interest you have is fully disclosed.

That's also true but, as I've said, it is usually/often possible to find someone who really is pretty independent. The potential bias in favour of one's client is a bit more difficult, particularly because it can be pretty 'subconscious'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

Nothing wrong with not being independent, as long as you don't allow yourself to have a conflict of interest, and any vested interest you have is fully disclosed.

Exactly, and a lot more honest than claiming to be 'independent'.

 

[JohnW2]

Nothing wrong with not being independent, as long as you don't allow yourself to have a conflict of interest, and any vested interest you have is fully disclosed.

Exactly, and a lot more honest than claiming to be 'independent'.

Very true, if one is actually not 'independent'.

I am, however, interested in trying to understand why you believe that 'independence' is so rare. I've spent a substantial amount of my time over the last few decades giving 'independent opinions' (quite often opinions which those paying me didn't want to hear!) and I find it difficult to understand in what sense I am not, or am not being, 'independent'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

I too. In fact "declarations of interest" is a standing item on BSI agendas.

My doubt is that a person could be found who has sufficient electrical knowledge and experience to review competently a draft that has already been considered by a panel of some 47 (in the case of the BGB) industry experts over a considerable time.

Harmonised standards giving presumption of conformity to New Approach Directives are routinely reviewed by so-called "independent" consultants, who occasionally make a useful contribution but more often just delay the project, or make suggestions that make the standard different but not actually better.

 

[333rocky333]

I wonder if "they" have considered how many fires, or temperature excursion events, will occur that would not have done before when people bring the tails into their metal CU through 2 separate holes?

genuine question, could it actually cause a fire

 

[securespark]

Talking of that, what about our old friend Eddy?

 

[JohnW2]

I too. In fact "declarations of interest" is a standing item on BSI agendas.

I would certainly have hoped so. However, that doesn't help to answer the question about the sense in which I am not 'independent' when I am asked to give an opinion about something - as far as I am concerned, with only a very occasional exception, I have no 'interests' to declare. I presume that many BSI committee members are employees of companies with potentially 'vested interests', which is an entirely different situation.

My doubt is that a person could be found who has sufficient electrical knowledge and experience to review competently a draft that has already been considered by a panel of some 47 (in the case of the BGB) industry experts over a considerable time.

You seem to have moved the goalposts way over the horizon, or maybe regressed to some past debates!!! We're not talking about trying ot find 'independent expert' who was 'expert enough in all relevant areas' to review the whole of BS7671! We are talking about someone with appropriate specific expertise to review an investigation undertaken by LFB (and others) to determine whether it afforded reasonably strong evidence that plastic CUs cause domestic fires - that is a narrow issue/question, which I would say is very suited to an appropriate 'independent expert opinion' (and, incidentally, quite probably beyond the areas of specific expertise of any members of JPEL/64).

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

John, I was not referring to your independence, or lack thereof, since I have no way of judging that.
If you read the document that BAS linked to earlier you will see the result of an "independent expert" review of the issue. It might well be beyond the specific expertise of the JPEL/64 members, but they have reviewed the proposal and its justification and have had the opportunity to challenge it. Presumably they were satisfied that there was a need for CUs to be in a non-flammable enclosure.

 

[ericmark]

Well lecture attended and regular answer to questions seemed to be "We are waiting for guidance."

One question asked was with JB's need to be metal. This was answered no, however I followed up that question and asked if you fit an enclosure before the consumer unit with a RCD in it does that need to be metal. He seemed to think it would but was uncertain on the answer.

It seems even consumer units in garages and sheds need now to be encased in steel.

The using of metal saddles for plastic conduit and metal cable ties was another point being made. Again above the door with self adhesive trunking is now out but above plaster board he seemed to think OK but not sure.

As to if central heating cables now comes under the new control cables section was also uncertain.

It would seem I attended the lecture too early and as yet there are still no answers to the questions.