Choc-block and tape in roof space??

[tictok]

Hello - long time lurker, first time poster...

Just moved into a new build about 2 months ago.
Investigating an issue this afternoon with soil vent in roof space which required I move a bunch of insulation out of the way in the loft.

As expected there are cables for lighting running around on top of plasterboard ceiling.

What I didn't expect to see was how they are connected.
No junction boxes, push fits etc, just chic-blocks wrapped in electrical tape.

Is this within building regs?

I guess as they're in the loft space the choc blocks are classed as accessible (even when under a good depth of insulation)??

If it's something that needs to be sorted 'officially' I'll get onto the developers customer care, otherwise I'm considering replacing with proper connectors or maybe even just spending a few quid on choc-boxes for peace of mind.

What do you think?

Thanks
Stef

 

[Taylortwocities]

Building Reg Part P calls on a number of other documents to provide the safety aspect of an installation.

The key document is the Wiring Regulations BS7671. This determines that cable junctions must be inside insulated enclosures. If the enclosure does not have built in strain relief for the cables, then the enclosure should be screwed to backgrounds and teh cables clipped.

Bits of chic block with insulation tape do not comply. Modern "insulation" tape is generally not fit for purpose, especially after a year or three of hot and cold treatment that you'll find in a loft.

I'd get them back to sort it out for you, properly.

 

[Risteard]

This determines that cable junctions must be inside insulated enclosures.

Whilst it needs to be in an enclosure, there is nothing wrong with an earthed metallic enclosure.

 

[JohnW2]

Just moved into a new build about 2 months ago. ... What I didn't expect to see was how they are connected. No junction boxes, push fits etc, just chic-blocks wrapped in electrical tape. ... Is this within building regs? ... If it's something that needs to be sorted 'officially' I'll get onto the developers customer care, otherwise I'm considering replacing with proper connectors or maybe even just spending a few quid on choc-boxes for peace of mind.

If I were you, I'd want to deal with this 'officially'. My real worry is that if such totally unacceptable work, which happened to be visible, was undertaken recently on a new build, one wonders what other horrors the 'electricians' may have perpetrated that may not be apparent to the naked and untrained eye.

It may sound like over-reaction but, in view of what you've discovered, if it were me I think I would be tempted to try to demand that the developers commissioned a (truly!) independent inspection of the entire electrical installation, and then rectified any defects that were revealed (as well as the ones you have found yourself).

Kind Regards, John

 

[tictok]

Thanks for your replies guys.

Yeah, my concern is that if the stuff I found os setting the bar for visible stuff, what might be hidden in wall cavities, between floors etc.

I don't think I'll get very far on a Sunday, buy in light of your advice I'll be taking the official route.

Thanks again - will keep thread updated with any progress.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

If it is new build, then it should hopefully be covered by the NHBC warranty and the electrics been untouched since being constructed I would be making calls.
I suspect if the alleged electrician has completed work like this in an area that is accessible and visible, the the stuff that cannot be a seen or accessed will not be of a quality/standard I would be happy with.
http://www.nhbc.co.uk/WarrantiesandCover/

Some pictures of your installation would be interesting to look at.

 

[mfarrow]

I would take a look at the documentation you got with the house and look for the Electrical Installation Certificate. This will hopefully have the name of the electrician's competent persons' scheme on it (NAPIT, NICEIC, ELECSA). Send them the photos for their opinion. This will be free advice and will assist better than a forum link in case the developer gets defensive.

 

[ericmark]

I would agree with others it's not acceptable. The BS7671:2008 does not lay down exactly how a house should be wired but lays out general rules.

An example here:-
412.2.2.3 Where a lid or door in an insulating enclosure can be opened without the use of a tool or key, all conductive parts which are accessible if the lid or door is open shall be behind an insulating barrier (providing a degree of protection not less than IPXXB or IP2X) preventing persons from coming unintentionally into contact with those conductive parts. This insulating barrier shall be removable only by the use of a tool or key.

Clearly insulation tape can be removed without a tool or key.

The strain relief is rather hard to tie to a single regulation.

522.8.5 Every cable or conductor shall be supported in such a way that it is not exposed to undue mechanical strain and so that there is no appreciable mechanical strain on the terminations of the conductors, account being taken of mechanical strain imposed by the supported weight of the cable or conductor itself.

Lying on a ceiling be it in the loft space or between floors is hardly going to impose a strain. The Guide books to the 17th Edition do lay out how often clips should be placed but as far as I can see it's not in the main document.

Clearly it is wrong but there is a difference to being wrong, not complying with regulations, and being dangerous.

I remember one job and OK working on 50VDC so not quite the same but we had to get all out parts from City Electrical Factors and often the supplies would be short of certain items. Silly things like conduit box lids and 4mm screws and when they did not arrive on time common for us to move on without fitting them and we would inform by phone the inspector and he should have fitted the missing parts when he inspected the installation. However months latter it transpired he too had problems with supply so quite a few were never corrected.

This could be something similar. It could have been he just forgot to return to fit the proper junction box when it arrived. Does not make it any less wrong but does give a reason why it was missed. So it is the reaction of builder which is important. If straight away he gets it corrected then likely just one over site where parts had not arrived. If he is reluctant then start wondering about the rest.

 

[JohnW2]

I suspect if the alleged electrician has completed work like this in an area that is accessible and visible, the the stuff that cannot be a seen or accessed will not be of a quality/standard I would be happy with. ...

Quite....

My real worry is that if such totally unacceptable work, which happened to be visible, was undertaken recently on a new build, one wonders what other horrors the 'electricians' may have perpetrated that may not be apparent to the naked and untrained eye.

Kind Regards, John

 

[plugwash]

Is this within building regs?

Unfortunately for you things are kinda messy.

The law only requires reasonable provision be taken to protect the users of the installation from fire or electric shock. Approved document P strongly advises working to BS7671 but neither approved document P or BS7671 are law in of themselves.

However the law also makes the work notifiable and afaict most self certification schemes and most building control departments will also push their members/clients into working to BS7671.

 

[JohnW2]

Is this within building regs?

Unfortunately for you things are kinda messy. ... The law only requires reasonable provision be taken to protect the users of the installation from fire or electric shock.

True, but the OP asked about the Building Regs, and they (Part P thereof) are, of course, 'the law' which you are quoting.

I would have thought that we could probably all agree that putting PVC tape around live electrical connections does not constitute "reasonable provision ... to protect from ... electric shock" - so I would say that the short answer to the OP's question is that such a practice is not "within the Building Regs", hence not lawful, wouldn't you?

Kind Regards, John

 

[plugwash]

I would have thought that we could probably all agree that putting PVC tape around live electrical connections does not constitute "reasonable provision ... to protect from ... electric shock"

If we were talking about bare metal terminals or soldered joints or uninsulated crimps I would agree with you. Tape that may peel off is IMO not reasonable protection for a joint that has no other protection (and in the case of a soldered joint may have sharp edges that can punch through tape)

But we aren't, we are talking about terminal block. Even without the tape a properly installed termina block has all live metal hidden down tunnels that are too narrow to stick your fingers down.

Which is not to say I would install or advocate installing such a thing, I'm just not convinced it actually poses a non-negligable electric shock risk and therefore while very poor workmanship I'd struggle to argue that it violated part P.

 

[securespark]

An example here:-
412.2.2.3 Where a lid or door in an insulating enclosure can be opened without the use of a tool or key, all conductive parts which are accessible if the lid or door is open shall be behind an insulating barrier (providing a degree of protection not less than IPXXB or IP2X) preventing persons from coming unintentionally into contact with those conductive parts. This insulating barrier shall be removable only by the use of a tool or key.

There are rules about site-applied insulation.

 

[JohnW2]

If we were talking about bare metal terminals or soldered joints or uninsulated crimps I would agree with you. Tape that may peel off is IMO not reasonable protection for a joint that has no other protection (and in the case of a soldered joint may have sharp edges that can punch through tape) .... But we aren't, we are talking about terminal block. Even without the tape a properly installed termina block has all live metal hidden down tunnels that are too narrow to stick your fingers down. ... Which is not to say I would install or advocate installing such a thing, I'm just not convinced it actually poses a non-negligable electric shock risk and therefore while very poor workmanship I'd struggle to argue that it violated part P.

I take your points, but I don't think I'd personally struggle all that much to argue that it violated Part P. Apart from anything else, it wouldn't surprise me all that much if someone capable of doing that also left exposed conductors outside of the insulating 'tunnels'. Perhaps more to the point, I assume that there was no sort of cable restraint / 'strain relief' - which, if these connections were just lying about in the loftspace, could possibly get 'yanked out', even without removing the tape.

In any event, I think the reality is that, given that Part P itself is so brief and vague, if a Court were ever asked to decide if work was in violation of 'the law' (i.e. Part P), they would probably look for guidance to sources such as BS7671 .

Whatever, as far as the OP is concerned, I don't think that the technicalities of what is and is not lawful is really of any great concern. I really don't believe that anyone with any sense would feel that 'professional' electrical work such as has been described is in any way acceptable in 2014, particularly in the context of a new build, when there really are 'no excuses'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ericmark]

To me the debate is not if poor workmanship clearly it is but what can be done about it.

As already pointed out likely the connector block will be compliant with IPXXB
or IP2X.

I have worked for people where I have done a temporary fix to get something running, and then have then been refused permission to return to do a proper fix. I learnt not to do temporary fixes as a result.

There are two possibilities one is the company is good and the electrician has on his own bat decided to take a short cut. In which case contacting the company will likely get it corrected. The other is the company is poor and does not give the materials he requires and he has not alternative either he quits or he takes a short cut. If that's the case your wasting your time trying to get it corrected.

I worked for a company contracted to British Gas who installed cookers. For gas cookers they were it seems A1 but for electric all sorts of corners were cut with no test equipment being supplied to it's workers. I left and told the agency what was going on and they decided not to supply them with electricians but I am sure they got electricians from some where. The bosses in that company just did not have a clue. OK it was some time ago hope their no longer trading.

But these cowboy firms do exist and when an electrician is out of work he has to consider where he is going to get money from so many are forced to cut corners. It's a fact of life.