If one could find a double socket with separate connections for each outlet (would probably have to use a 'modular' approach), what UK regulation would prevent one having the two fed from different phases? (quite apart from the fact that regulations do not define what is 'allowed' in the UK).
No EIC for recent Flat conversion
- Thread starter frank999
- Start date
Sponsored Links
It would seem our regulators think it does matter.
Unpolarised sockets matter with say lamps fitted with ES bulbs and single pole switches. Can’t see how the circuit rating affects it. A few mA through the heart can kill whither it comes from a 16 or 32 amp circuit.
I thought if was frowned upon to have 2 phases in the same room in a domestic situation let alone at the same socket outlet.
Does it? How?
As you so often say - the rest of the world copes?
Do you really need someone to explain?
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 23,621
- Reaction score
- 2,661
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
Yep so did I, but can't find anything in the regs to say not allowed.
The LAP grid system would allow two sockets in the same double socket arrangement to have different phases.
Interesting did wonder how they did it, I know the USA drills etc can over heat with 50 Hz instead of 60 Hz, over the years had a lot of problems with imported USA equipment, specially when used on building sites, as they have twice the voltage to earth to what we use. Also some of there systems have delta wound transformers with one delta winding centre tapped and bonded to earth so actually 135 volt to earth, OK better than 230 volt but a lot worse than the 64 volt allowed on UK building site.
I have looked at using site equipment in the home, however the problem is a 12 amp trip on incoming supply to a 110 volt site transformer can deliver 50 amp to earth, and in the main we have no earth leakage protection on 110 volt site supplies, so actually there can be more not less danger when using 110 volt site supplies.
USA equipment has far thicker cables than used in standard UK stuff, and like the French and German sockets the earth does not have to be provided with all socket outlets, however unlike the French and German a plug with an earth pin can't be plugged into a socket with no earth connection, and like French and English any equipment needing an earth is polarised, it is only the Germans who used non polarised sockets.
However our type AC RCD is not allowed in most of Europe and they did start using RCD's before us, so a German socket protected with a type AC RCD would not be allowed in Germany we are told? But how can be be sure? Even if we had a copy of their regulations most of us could not read them.
So even if theory it says any EU regulations, we really don't have the option as can't read them.
In Welsh and French there is a word that both means how are you, and I am well, depending where used, there is no direct translation into English so there are bound to be errors in translation. We have argued about what this means.
How could anyone translate that to another language when we are not even sure what it means in English? It is stated as it says "single-core" then if not single core it can be over-marked, however there is a full stop at end of purpose, so green-and-yellow can't be used etc. Not wanting to debate if green-and-yellow can be used, but pointing out how hard it would be to translate.
Who exactly do you regard as "our regulators" - there is no explicit detailed 'regulation' of electrical work in the UK, just a very vague requirement that it should be safe enough not to result in injury to persons or damage to property.
Exactly. As I implied, I am unaware of any regulation which prevents two outlets in a double socket being on different phases - and nor can I see any particular reason why it should not be allowed.
Exactly. That's obviously one example of what I meant by "a modular approach".
Kind Regards, John
I thought there was a requirement for warning labels when two sockets on different phases were in close proximity, did that get dropped at some point?
edit: doing some googling it seems the regulation was previously confusingly worded, but the modern version of the regulation only applies when the voltage to earth is above 230V, not to phase to phase voltages.
edit: doing some googling it seems the regulation was previously confusingly worded, but the modern version of the regulation only applies when the voltage to earth is above 230V, not to phase to phase voltages.
I seem to recall that there was at some point (although I never really understood the point), but I think it disappeared quite a while ago.
Indeed, and it only applies to voltages >230V relative to earth within an item of equipment or enclosure - so would not apply to different accessories in close proximity, anyway....
BS7671:2018 said:
Kind Regards, John
.
Many thanks for the replies.
So from a Solicitors and lenders point of view the BCO completion certificate should suffice ??? that then leaves the legal defence.
So if the regulations are there to ensure safety, then does not an EIC Installation Certificate ensure that the things you cant see to inspect, once a job is finished - will help ensure that safety, over and above the EICR.
My understanding is that the EIC certifies 100% of the circuits and accessories in an installation, where as an EICR certifies only 25%, if you come offsite having had only 25% of the installation certified aren't you rather on the back foot if any part of the installation should fail at a later date and cause damage - and someone wanted to point a finger of blame for not having had 100% of the installation certified, OR as seems to be suggested here that you could whip out your EICR (assuming you had one instead of an EIC) and the finger pointers would then legally have to step down.
So for a new installation if you are legally 100% covered with an EICR rather than an EIC, is the EIC then optional ?? or have I got this all wrong.
'SelbstbedienungsWaschsalongemact' is German for 'Launderette', any DE translation would indeed be a weighty tome ...
So from a Solicitors and lenders point of view the BCO completion certificate should suffice ??? that then leaves the legal defence.
So if the regulations are there to ensure safety, then does not an EIC Installation Certificate ensure that the things you cant see to inspect, once a job is finished - will help ensure that safety, over and above the EICR.
My understanding is that the EIC certifies 100% of the circuits and accessories in an installation, where as an EICR certifies only 25%, if you come offsite having had only 25% of the installation certified aren't you rather on the back foot if any part of the installation should fail at a later date and cause damage - and someone wanted to point a finger of blame for not having had 100% of the installation certified, OR as seems to be suggested here that you could whip out your EICR (assuming you had one instead of an EIC) and the finger pointers would then legally have to step down.
So for a new installation if you are legally 100% covered with an EICR rather than an EIC, is the EIC then optional ?? or have I got this all wrong.
'SelbstbedienungsWaschsalongemact' is German for 'Launderette', any DE translation would indeed be a weighty tome ...
Last edited:
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 23,621
- Reaction score
- 2,661
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
Unless there is a death, no one worries, I have said before in theory you even 25 years latter you could claim if a tradesman or professional gets it wrong, in practice it is very rare.
As I've said, that would certainly be my view - but others may disagree.
I think you are perhaps reading rather too much into the significance of an EIC. The only sense in which it achieves what you suggest (over and above an EICR) is that the person who did the work (some of which may not subsequently be accessible for inspection) signs a declaration that all of the work was undertaken in compliance with BS7671 - but, to quote a young lady from a good few decades ago, "he [or she!] would, wouldn't he?"
The person commissioning an EICR is free to agree with the scope (however little or much) of the EIUCR with the person who is going to undertake it - but EICRs of domestic installations will generally involve the inspection of everything accessible for visual inspection and testing of 100% of the circuits. The 25% (or whatever, as agreed) relates to the removal of accessories (primarily switches and sockets) to inspect the wiring. However, again, in the case of an EIC all you have is the signature of the person who did the work to give any confidence that it was done in compliance with BS7671 - there is no additional 'inspection' (of their own work!) involved in producing an EIC.
Any electrical work (even if trivial and non-notifiable, and even if done by a non-electrician) should theoretically (in terms of BS7671, which is non-mandatory) result in the person who did the work providing an EIC (or Minor Works Cert, where appropriate) and signing the declaration that they did the work in compliance with BS7671 - and I don't fully understand why, in your case, the person who actually did the work can't, or couldn't, do that.
Kind Regards, John
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 23,621
- Reaction score
- 2,661
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
If I have this right, the builders electrician did not actually do the work, but trusted the builder and would normally sign that he was in control of what the builder has done, in other words the builder was like his apprentice, so since the builder never completed then I can understand why that electrician would not issue an EIC, as work not completed. Your normal electrician clearly can't issue an EIC he can only issue an EICR, however the LABC will accept that as proof the whole job was completed, together with their own inspection.
So there is a slim chance there was some thing which the builder had intended to do, which in fact he didn't do, which is now hidden from view.
No bit of paperwork will change that.
So there is a slim chance there was some thing which the builder had intended to do, which in fact he didn't do, which is now hidden from view.
No bit of paperwork will change that.
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 42,711
- Reaction score
- 2,629
- Country
You're a few Editions out of date.
Even back then you could do it, but you had to use warning stickers, and in some cases barriers and placing out of reach.
- Joined
- 25 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 2,388
- Reaction score
- 555
- Country
Had to have an EICR done in the last quarter for house letting reasons. As that EICR was the first one done on that property (rewired in 1978) the inspecting electrician did a 100% check of all sockets, light fittings and junction boxes.
I would say that because it's the first EICR then you will see the inspecting electrician do a 100% inspection.
I would say that because it's the first EICR then you will see the inspecting electrician do a 100% inspection.
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
- sparkyspike
- Electrics UK
