Kitchen Wiring Assistance

scousespark · Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:02 pm

JohnW2 wrote:

scousespark wrote:

I don't think the LABC is interested in whether a joint is accessible.

That's worth knowing. Are you saying that if I notify some work which I then undertake by putting conventional JBs under my floorboards and nailing them down, that the LABC will have no problem with that?

Kind Regards, John.

No I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the LABC in spectors don't get that deeply involved. They take the word of the electrician who
signs off the installation.

JohnW2 · Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:31 pm

scousespark wrote:

No I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the LABC in spectors don't get that deeply involved. They take the word of the electrician who signs off the installation.

Indeed, but we're playing with words here. LABC have the ultimately responsibility for ensuring that Part P has been complied with. How they satisfy themselves of that compliance is up to them. My point (per my 'rhetorical question') was that they obviously must have an 'interest' in what is, and is not, accessible, even if they delegate the decision to an electrician who is not an employee of 'LABC'.

Kind Regards, John.

mikhailfaradayski · Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 4:55 pm

Why don't you call your local LABC to discuss the issue, find out if they actually give a monkeys?

I'm sure they'll be happy to discuss it at length with you

ban-all-sheds · Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 11:10 pm

JohnW2 wrote:

Indeed, but we're playing with words here. LABC have the ultimately responsibility for ensuring that Part P has been complied with. How they satisfy themselves of that compliance is up to them. My point (per my 'rhetorical question') was that they obviously must have an 'interest' in what is, and is not, accessible, even if they delegate the decision to an electrician who is not an employee of 'LABC'.

You face 2 problems here.

1) The inability of an awful lot of people to distinguish between "have an interest in" and "be interested in".

2) The fact that councils employ people to check compliance with Part P who are not competent to do so.

scousespark · Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2012 12:01 pm

JohnW2 wrote:

scousespark wrote:

No I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the LABC in spectors don't get that deeply involved. They take the word of the electrician who signs off the installation.

Indeed, but we're playing with words here. LABC have the ultimately responsibility for ensuring that Part P has been complied with. How they satisfy themselves of that compliance is up to them. My point (per my 'rhetorical question') was that they obviously must have an 'interest' in what is, and is not, accessible, even if they delegate the decision to an electrician who is not an employee of 'LABC'.

Kind Regards, John.

The inspector just wants to know it's safe. It doesn't matter to him/her that a JB is in a circuit. That's a relevant as whether the circuit is RCD protected or buried deep enough.