smoke alarm, seperate mcb reqd

[jbkirky]

Just had an extension built so have to fit 2 smoke alarms (interconnected and hard wired). Can I go into a lighting circuit at the consumer board or do I need a seperate one !! The reason I ask is that I have no spaces left at the distribution board. Approved Doc B seems unclear but I know the buildiing inspector will check ! Thanks

[DetlefSchmitz]

Put them on a regularly used lighting circuit. Then you will notice it it has tripped. A separate MCB will not provide that safety feature.

[Christhescott]

I always double the smoke circuit with a lighting mcb at the consumer unit. If smoke alarms have a seperate mcb there is more chance of them being switched off and left off. Thats how I look at it but I know other people like to do things differently. I have never had any issues with building inspectors.

[Taylortwocities]

Christhescott wrote:

I have never had any issues with building inspectors.

Well, you are a very lucky man then!

[ban-all-sheds]

jbkirky wrote:

Just had an extension built so have to fit 2 smoke alarms (interconnected and hard wired). Can I go into a lighting circuit at the consumer board or do I need a seperate one !! The reason I ask is that I have no spaces left at the distribution board. Approved Doc B seems unclear but I know the buildiing inspector will check ! Thanks

When you applied for Building Regulations approval, what did you say would be the way that you'd comply with part P?

[DetlefSchmitz]

Here we go on the attack again.

So, BAS, when you did that work in your kitchen, that work in your bathroom, and that work in your garden, respectively, what did you say would be the way you would comply with the law, when you applied for approval? I'm sure it would be a great help to many people to find out how a law-abiding person does it.

[securespark]

[To Mrs Secure]

"Darling, can you pass me that flak jacket and helmet, please?"

[ban-all-sheds]

DetlefSchmitz wrote:

Here we go on the attack again.

Christ, you really are f*****g thick aren't you.

If I asked you to to provide a reasoned and credible explain of how

"When you applied for Building Regulations approval, what did you say would be the way that you'd comply with part P?"

is an attack would you:

a) Giggle, and dribble a little bit.

b) Stare into the middle distance with an unfocused, slack-jawed expression.

c) Ignore the request.

d) All of the above.


You can stop reading now, as what follows is beyond your ability to comprehend, but for anybody who can read without moving their lips:

The electrical work is notifiable, and when the Building Regulations submission was made the OP would have had to describe how he would ensure that it complied with Part P. The nature of the commitment he made to Building Control, failing to honour which could land him in a mess with them, affects what he should be advised to do regarding electrical installation design decisions.

[DetlefSchmitz]

That seems like a lot of abusive language to avoid answering a simple question. I do hope this doesn't mean that you didn't report your activities, as required by the law.

I also wonder if the implied quotation you are using as a signature; presumably "Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens"; doesn't rather worrying suggest that you consider yourself to be god-like, which at least explains why you are above the law. Goodness me, your last signature, in which you attempted to excommunicate other forum users, suggested you thought you were the Pope, and now this! I should warn you that back in my country about 70 years ago we had to put up with someone similar, who liked shouting a lot, but he came to a sticky end.

With friendly regards,
Detlev.

[ban-all-sheds]

DetlefSchmitz wrote:

That seems like a lot of abusive language to avoid answering a simple question.

No - it's a genuine expression of anger and disgust directed at someone who reads a reasonable question, written in perfectly reasonable language, and decides, with absolutely no evidence, to accuse the person who wrote it of mounting an attack.

Quote:

I do hope this doesn't mean that you didn't report your activities, as required by the law.

Why, what the f*** does it have to do with you?

Quote:

I also wonder if the implied quotation you are using as a signature; presumably "Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens"; doesn't rather worrying suggest that you consider yourself to be god-like, which at least explains why you are above the law.

I think you need to get out more.

Quote:

Goodness me, your last signature, in which you attempted to excommunicate other forum users, suggested you thought you were the Pope,

On second thoughts perhaps you shouldn't be allowed out at all.

[echoes]

DetlefSchmitz wrote:

I should warn you that back in my country about 70 years ago we had to put up with someone similar, who liked shouting a lot, but he came to a sticky end.

Godwin's Law in 9 posts!

[Chapster]

http://blog.sparksdirect.co.uk/the-17th-edition-myth-exploded-concerning-the-fire-smoke-and-heat-alarms/

[DetlefSchmitz]

echoes wrote:

Godwin's Law in 9 posts!

[DetlefSchmitz]

ban-all-sheds wrote:

I think you need to get out more.

Pot - kettle...

[Paul_C]

DetlefSchmitz wrote:

Put them on a regularly used lighting circuit. Then you will notice it it has tripped. A separate MCB will not provide that safety feature.

Seconded. Or should that be thirded?