Is my wiring legal?

Hey everyone,

We have been renovating our house for the last year or two and are finally getting towards finishing (or so we thought!)

We have just had an electrician round to add a couple of sockets having had 'most' of the wiring redone last year by a different qualified electrician who replaced all sockets/replaced all lighting circuits with downlights, replaced consumer unit etc. We have full NIC EIC test certificates from the original electrician.

When adding the new sockets to the upstairs ring the new electrician said the earth to most sockets appears not to be connected (he has showed me this on his circuit tester). From what he can see in 4 places somewhere between sockets the earth wiring has become disconnected/broken hence there's no earth.

He has found the two sockets that have the the earth coming from the consumer unit, one of which is correctly connected to the consumer unit, one of which is not. Most of the wiring from the new consumer unit is using the old wiring (so they didn't replace it) however on one of the sockets that it runs to there is new wiring. As a result the new electrician said that they have obviously used a hidden junction box somewhere to join the old wiring and the new wiring. He said that this is against regulations as they have to be accessible.

I just wanted to confirm this would be a violation of the regs (as from reading on the internet there seems to be some debate as to what is 'accessible')

The original company were not very good but given it seems as though it's going to be reasonably expensive to fix it i want to get them to come and sort it out. I know they will make any excuses they can to cover themselves and i wanted to see if the hidden connection of old to new wiring was illegal so i have at least one claim against them? I'm sure they'll claim it happened after they left but it seems amazing that the connections for 4 different sections of hidden earth wiring has been damaged or disconnected within about a year of installation?

I would greatly appreciate your thoughts as we need to get this sorted asap and i want as much ammo as possible before going back to them as i know they are going to deny any problems.

Thanks so much,

Dave

deshg said:

We have just had an electrician round to add a couple of sockets having had 'most' of the wiring redone last year by a different qualified electrician who replaced all sockets/replaced all lighting circuits with downlights, replaced consumer unit etc. We have full NIC EIC test certificates from the original electrician.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately there is not much that can stop an unscrupulous electrician from filling out certificates with fabricated results.

When adding the new sockets to the upstairs ring the new electrician said the earth to most sockets appears not to be connected (he has showed me this on his circuit tester). From what he can see in 4 places somewhere between sockets the earth wiring has become disconnected/broken hence there's no earth.

Click to expand...

Clearly needs further investigation to find the location and cause of the breaks. One or two breaks could possiblly be explained by bad luck (sometimes a screw feels tight without being properly tightned on the conductor) or later disturbance but with as many as four breaks though it sounds like the install was both hurridly slapped together and never tested properly.

He has found the two sockets that have the the earth coming from the consumer unit, one of which is correctly connected to the consumer unit, one of which is not. Most of the wiring from the new consumer unit is using the old wiring (so they didn't replace it)

Click to expand...

Did your original agreement specify that it would be replaced?

however on one of the sockets that it runs to there is new wiring. As a result the new electrician said that they have obviously used a hidden junction box somewhere to join the old wiring and the new wiring. He said that this is against regulations as they have to be accessible.

Click to expand...

Your new electrician is jumping to conclusions a bit. While normal junction boxes are required to be accessible there are approved ways of joining cables in inaccessible locations.

Which leads to an obvious problem, if you can't access a junction for inspection you can't tell if the junction was made in a way that is approved for inaccessible use.

I just wanted to confirm this would be a violation of the regs (as from reading on the internet there seems to be some debate as to what is 'accessible')

Click to expand...

A big problem with domestic installs is that it is rare to find good documentation on them. It may be that the hidden connection is actually quite easy to access but if you don't know where it is then that doesn't help you much.

plugwash said:

deshg said:

He has found the two sockets that have the the earth coming from the consumer unit, one of which is correctly connected to the consumer unit, one of which is not. Most of the wiring from the new consumer unit is using the old wiring (so they didn't replace it)

Click to expand...

Did your original agreement specify that it would be replaced?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Thanks so much for your speedy response, it is massively appreciated! I am hoping that the joins are somewhere that's accessible and we just can't find them but i think that's very optimistic!! Although if as you say there are legal ways of joining inaccessible cables then i'm sure they'll say that's what they've done to cover themselves!

The original agreement didn't say they'd replace all the wiring so that's not a problem, although the current electrician says they way they've done it is against regs; the earth wiring coming from the consumer unit is old wiring but there is new wiring in the first socket it goes to. As a result somewhere hidden between the consumer unit and this socket the old and new wiring has been joined together. He said you are not supposed to join old and new cables in a hidden location and that the whole cable should be replaced or the old wiring should run to the socket where the join should be. Is this correct or is this debatable as well?

Thank you so much for your help, i stupidly assumed because the first electricians where NIC registered and provided test reports that everything would have been done correctly but i guess that's a lesson for the future!

Dave

It's a little complex. Junction boxes need to be accessible for maintenance and inspection unless they are "maintenance free" (there's a BS publication specifying what this means). There is also some controversy over what "accessible" means. The regs say "accessible" but don't define this. It's generally agreed that under floorboards is not "accessible". It also might be argued that a junction box cannot be both hidden and accessible. To complicate matters further, when the regs change, it means that new work has to be done to that standard. It doesn't means that existing work has to be changed.

There is also the issue of the work that you had done. If the CU was changed, it should have been tested and the lack of CPC (earth) continuity should have been bleeding obvious. It would be interesting to see what test results were written on the certificate. It would be hard to believe that the CPC broke twice in a year, let alone four times!

From what I'm reading, I'd be more weary of the new electrician than the original one. Some of his comments smack of someone who doesn't especially know what they're doing.

ekmdgrf said:

It's a little complex. Junction boxes need to be accessible for maintenance and inspection unless they are "maintenance free" (there's a BS publication specifying what this means). There is also some controversy over what "accessible" means. The regs say "accessible" but don't define this. It's generally agreed that under floorboards is not "accessible". It also might be argued that a junction box cannot be both hidden and accessible. To complicate matters further, when the regs change, it means that new work has to be done to that standard. It doesn't means that existing work has to be changed.

There is also the issue of the work that you had done. If the CU was changed, it should have been tested and the lack of CPC (earth) continuity should have been bleeding obvious. It would be interesting to see what test results were written on the certificate. It would be hard to believe that the CPC broke twice in a year, let alone four times!

Click to expand...

Thanks for your confirmation ekmdgrf, i am also finding it hard to believe it would break in 4 places but then i can't believe they'd lie on the test certificate, that seems completely outrageous (but so i'm learning i shouldn't expect anything to be done properly!)

Are you allowed to connect old wiring to new wiring even with hidden 'maintenance free' junctions or is this a no no?

Thanks so much,

Dave

DaftPunk said:

From what I'm reading, I'd be more weary of the new electrician than the original one. Some of his comments smack of someone who doesn't especially know what they're doing.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your comment DaftPunk, what comments imply he doesn't know what he's doing (so i know what to question him on)? My problem is the fact they are NIC etc registered seems to have no bearing on whether they know what they're doing or not and i have no way of knowing so i'm in between a rock and a hard place. I can keep on getting electricians in but who is to say which one is right and which one is wrong! I'm starting to think i need to train as a sparks just to establish whether or not my house is going to burn down due to dodgy wiring!

deshg said:

i can't believe they'd lie on the test certificate, that seems completely outrageous

Click to expand...

It does, doesn't it? This isn't the first time I've heard of it happening.

deshg said:

Are you allowed to connect old wiring to new wiring even with hidden 'maintenance free' junctions or is this a no no?

Click to expand...

I can't think of any concrete reason why you can't. Jointing cables isn't a fantastic solution, so if a new cable needs to be joined to another, the ideal way to to pull the lot out and run a new section of cable. That said, sometimes it's a major problem to do this and the only pragmatic solution is to join the cables.

How can someone tell that it is broken in four places?
Other than exhaustive testing at every point to the next, of course.

You have said it is a ring and it probably is.
For there to be no earth at some sockets two breaks are necessary.
Past these breaks there will be no earth connection at any of the sockets.

Why would he test for further breaks in this unearthed section?

Are you sure he didn't just say there was no earth at four sockets?

If you post up the certificate you received from the original works (including test results and inspection schedule, (blank out personal details)) it would help.

In my experience membership of one of the registrations schemes/scams matters not a jot with regard to the quality of work carried out.

skenk said:

If you post up the certificate you received from the original works (including test results and inspection schedule, (blank out personal details)) it would help.

In my experience membership of one of the registrations schemes/scams matters not a jot with regard to the quality of work carried out.

Click to expand...

I really think I missed a trick in not setting up one of these trade schemes. Call yourself a scheme, collect the membership, it's a license to print money. It's even better than running a gym, you don't even need to provide a facility for the two people that actually use it.

ekmdgrf said:

... It also might be argued that a junction box cannot be both hidden and accessible.

Click to expand...

I suppose that depends on what you mean by 'hidden'. Given that they (and associated cabling) are not particularly pretty, they are often to be found in places which are not normally 'in view' (would you count that as 'hidden'?), yet are (at least to my mind) perfectly 'accessible' for maintenance, inspection and testing. Even CU's, which are full of non-MF joints which have to be accessible, are often 'hidden' from normal view.

FWIW, I agree with everything else you wrote.

Kind Regards, John

skenk said:

In my experience membership of one of the registrations schemes/scams matters not a jot with regard to the quality of work carried out.

Click to expand...

Quite so, being a member of such a scheme proves that a person has demonstrated the capability to do the job properly not that (s)he always will. Examples of work are inspected by the scheme operators from time to time in an attempt to see that standards are maintained but most of the time it comes down to the honesty of the individual.

It's no different from the "quality control" systems for other things in everyday life. For example, I have a driving licence, that means that I have demonstrated at some point that I'm capable of driving a car safely. Now I could go out and drive properly 100% of the time or I could go out and commit offences left, right and centre, knowing that the chance of getting caught is relatively small....

skenk said:

In my experience membership of one of the registrations schemes/scams matters not a jot with regard to the quality of work carried out.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately this is true, but it is also true of unregistered electricians regards quality of work. I come across of a lot of shoddy work by both registered and unregistered electricians but what can be done? I have on occasion when noticed dangerous work contacted both the installer and their associated body if registered but it matters not as normally Jacobs Excrement gets done about it.

Robin0577 said:

It's no different from the "quality control" systems for other things in everyday life. For example, I have a driving licence, that means that I have demonstrated at some point that I'm capable of driving a car safely. Now I could go out and drive properly 100% of the time or I could go out and commit offences left, right and centre, knowing that the chance of getting caught is relatively small....

Click to expand...

In some senses, driving licences are even worse than 'schemes', since the latter at least make a token attempt at 'continuing assessment'. A neighbour of mine once passed a driving test and got a driving licence, but then did not drive for over 40 years until, recently, she bought a car and started driving it!

Kind Regards, John