Clarification of part P - simple work in a kitchen

Hi all,

I have read the section in the wiki but just want to ensure Im reading it correctly;

As part of a renovation of my kitchen I was planning to change a light switch, and double socket, as the old ones are looking messy. Fit a new fluorescent light fitting in place of the current one and replace an unused cooker switch / socket with a single switched socket. The vast majority of the work will be like for like replacement (with the exception of the cooker switch)

As I read it following the letter of the law I would need to either get someone in to do the work or notify the building control department of me doing the work. Is this a correct interpretation or am I being overcautious.

Thanks.

Interpretation will vary..........

Maintenance work is permitted providing you don't change anything other than the fitting.

So you can change the style of plates for ones that do the same thing. You can't change your cooker switch to a standard twin plug socket.

It's debatable, but you could get a cooker switch with a socket in it, and use that. Grey area being that doing so might be outside the "like for like" book of rules.

Not trying to pump up the profession, but kitchens are areas of concern, and an RCD / RCBO device would be prudent.
Since you are only maintaining the property there is no 'must' requirement about updating.
Having a trade person do the work does come with the benefit of safety assured and full job tested with certs.

That has great value should you be looking at moving, now and in the future, buyers expect such works to be backed by proof of safety. the cert is just that.

Thanks chri5.

Thats a valid point about the work being guaranteed for future buyers if done by a professional. I may be tempted to do the simple like for like jobs myself and get an electrician for the bits which are real changes to the purpose of the unit. The cooker point I mention has a single socket plus the cooker switch so I guess you could argue fitting a single socket in its place is actually removing bits rather than adding new fittings!

Will get some prices for the work and take it from there.

Thanks.

Chri5 said:

Interpretation will vary..........

Click to expand...

Not if you read the actual regulations.

Maintenance work is permitted providing you don't change anything other than the fitting.

Click to expand...

Not that it applies in this case but you may also replace a damaged cable for a single circuit.

So you can change the style of plates for ones that do the same thing. You can't change your cooker switch to a standard twin plug socket.

Click to expand...

squeekykilt said:

replace an unused cooker switch / socket with a single switched socket.

Click to expand...

It's debatable, but you could get a cooker switch with a socket in it, and use that.

Click to expand...

squeekykilt said:

replace an unused cooker switch / socket with a single switched socket.

Click to expand...

Grey area being that doing so might be outside the "like for like" book of rules.

Click to expand...

"Like for like", or any equivalent, does not appear anywhere in the regulations, and I think it quite reasonable to regard a 1-gang socket outlet and a 2-gang socket outlet as each being a socket outlet - you don't use the plural "sockets" when talking about one 2-gang. So if he wanted to squeeky could replace his CCU with a 2-gang socket as he would not be adding a socket to the circuit.

Hopefully I'm wrong about part P and my dislike of the legislation is ill founded.

my understanding is that you can't change anything at all, with one odd exception: where a fitting is damaged. Anyone is allowed to replace damaged fittings which makes no sense to me. If we are all so incompetent that part P needed to be mandatory then the only correct action when a damaged or hazardous condition is found ought to be to isolate at the fuse board / breaker board and call in an expert.

Your understanding is deeply flawed. How did you come by it?

You should return it and get a better one. Try here: //www.diynot.com/wiki/electrics:part-p

probably in some articles in the IEE magazine at the time when part P was being considered/introduced. Certainly before 2006. Upto 1998 I used design high power high voltage equipment used in the production of memory chips so used to be conversant with lots of international requirements as well as the domestic ones for what was undoubtedly a lethal piece of equipment.

--------------

It is a relief to know that I'm still as competent as I ever was to change the light fittings in the sitting room for example.

-----------

So am I allowed to change a damaged fitting in a kitchen or not? Perhaps I'm reading too much into the 16th/17th ed regulations and the hoohaa in the press at the time has overly influenced me. If the legislation considers me insufficiently competent to change a working socket in a kitchen it should be even more suspicious of my ability to deal with a socket that is already compromised along with any consequential damage that may have been caused to the wiring and mechanical support of said socket.

When the house was built and wired (17years ago) by the then compentent electricians employed by the builders despite my requests and offer to pay not a single rcb was fitted I wanted a different main board than the cheap unit they supplied to be used. No can do was the answer. Just about every cable is within 50mm of the surface and all concealed. The mains operated ventilation fans in the ensuite and bath room can easily be operated whilst standing in the shower or bath. Extraneous metal work in the kitchen and bathrooms wasn't bonded. lighting runs in the loft were covered in insulation and worse the loads in the circuits were very unbalanced.

The house didn't come with any bits of paper and even if it had the bits of paper would not have made it safe.

sorry about the rant.
many thanks for the link.

NoPoke said:

So am I allowed to change a damaged fitting in a kitchen or not? Perhaps I'm reading too much into the 16th/17th ed regulations and the hoohaa in the press at the time has overly influenced me. If the legislation considers me insufficiently competent to change a working socket in a kitchen it should be even more suspicious of my ability to deal with a socket that is already compromised along with any consequential damage that may have been caused to the wiring and mechanical support of said socket.

Click to expand...

Approved Document part P specifically states that "replacement, repair and maintenance jobs are generally not notifiable, even if carried out in a kitchen or a special location or associated with a special installation."

And who are we to argue with that...

Shame they had to put in the word "generally". If they are generally not notifiable, under what conditions do they become notifiable? (other than if they affect the circuit protection etc)

Answers on a postcard.....

My interpretation as a non professional is that you can replace existing fittings as long as you are just changing the face plate and not altering the wiring. Same goes for the light fitting. To change the cooker outlet for a socket would require a change of circuit protection in the CU to make it safe and would thus be notifiable.

MarkBarl said:

To change the cooker outlet for a socket would require a change of circuit protection in the CU to make it safe.

Click to expand...

Why?

ban-all-sheds said:

MarkBarl said:

To change the cooker outlet for a socket would require a change of circuit protection in the CU to make it safe.

Click to expand...

Why?

Click to expand...

Fuse at CU could be over the 32A prescribed for a socket. If it is then the work should be notified, tested and certified as a change to the existing circuit.

a) a 2-gang 13A cannot draw more than a nominal 26A because of the fuses in BS 1363-1 plugs

b) there is nothing in BS 1363-2 which mentions a 32A fuse being required.

Chri5 said:

Fuse at CU could be over the 32A prescribed for a socket.

Click to expand...

Prescribed where?