Black and red twin and earth

[davelx]

Especially when they have no earth connection, and only do the job of a manual isolator.

Yes just noticed that and was about to comment- - though that means it's more likely to be an RCD.

And if you do as you suggest and put a 100mA type S in then you will have contravened the wring regulations.

That's true, and shows one of the problems with the regs. Leave it alone and you haven't contravened the regs. Make an immediate improvement to safety pending a new CU and you contravene the regs. Best leave it dangerous until a new CU can be installed then.

Since the regs are not statutory, and making this change leaves the installation in a safer condition than before, frankly, IDGAS.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Yes just noticed that and was about to comment- - though that means it's more likely to be an RCD.

As does the black test button.

Since the regs are not statutory, and making this change leaves the installation in a safer condition than before

It would not make it safer in any meaningful or worthwhile way.

frankly, IDGAS.

You may be sure that I, at least, will not forget that your attitude to complying with the regulations, and certifying work, is that you DGAS.

 

[davelx]

You may be sure that I, at least, will not forget that your attitude to complying with the regulations, and certifying work, is that you DGAS.

You may be sure that I don't care whether you forget or not.

 

[pilsbury]

Seems like best thing for me to do then is leave well alone. At some point in the near future I intend to redo the kitchen. Plenty of lights and sockets to fit, so that might be the time to get a sparky to upgrade to a CU.

 

[PBC_1966]

It's definitely an RCD - Apart from the absence of earth connections already mentioned, the design is much too modern for it to be a voltage-operated ELCB. Looks like a Crabtree RCCB to me.

I'd say the rewire was probably carried out late 1970's or early 1980's based upon the particular Wylex Standard range board, assuming that it wasn't already new-old stock when installed. The RCCB is a much later addition, and probably did replace a voltage ELCB (and somebody made a real mess of that cover!).
The yellow sticker on the Wylex board is also quite new - Based on the telephone number probably no more than about 15 years old, and likely added by the company which installed the RCD. A quick search suggests it was 24-7 Electrical Ltd, of Wolverhampton.

The old Post Office Telephones document tucked behind the meter is a nice touch!

 

[conny]

A word of warning! Many years ago, (mid 70's), when I bought my first house I asked if it had been rewired. The seller said he thought the previous owner had had it done.He removed a socket to show me 2 grey T&E cables running under the floorboards.
Moved in a short while later and a couple of weeks down the line fuses started blowing. After repairing them a number of times I got an electrician to have a look. He showed me the 2 grey cables terminating in a junction box under the floor boards and from there everything else was black rubber cable. Sockets, lights and even the cooker circuit. Because I hadn't asked the surveyor for a report I had no means of recompense.

 

[skenk]

Surveyors haven't a clue about electrics anyway, you'd have needed an electrician to inspect & report

 

[PBC_1966]

That's true, and shows one of the problems with the regs. Leave it alone and you haven't contravened the regs. Make an immediate improvement to safety pending a new CU and you contravene the regs. Best leave it dangerous until a new CU can be installed then.

Good, isn't it? But to some people. not falling foul of the holy grail of BS7671 takes precedence over making an immediate improvement by whatever means is practical at the time.

 

[pilsbury]

Good, isn't it? But to some people. not falling foul of the holy grail of BS7671 takes precedence over making an immediate improvement by whatever means is practical at the time.

Fully understand this - regs can be a pain in the butt, but I suppose they are there for the reason to stop "have a go heros" bodging their way through. As I said, in the very near future I shall be knocking through a wall to make a large kitchen/diner. That will be the time to upgrade in the proper way.

 

[PBC_1966]

Surveyors haven't a clue about electrics anyway, you'd have needed an electrician to inspect & report

I think that probably applies the world over. The home inspections carried out here are supposed to cover electrics along with everything else, but it's the same story.

The inspection on our current home (only done because of financing) noted one obvious issue of a non-weatherproof receptacle installed on the outside with lamp cord clipped along under the patio door and plugged into a proper outdoor receptacle. But at the same time it somehow missed the lash-up feed to the shed which was just an extension cord threaded through a bit of pipe and plugged into the same outdoor outlet!

It noted some of the specific things that they're told to look for and recommend changes, like receptacles not on GFCI where current code requires them. But it completely missed the rather more serious issue of a multi-wire branch circuit (3-wire circuit to 120V loads with shared neutral) with the breakers both on the same pole of the supply.

 

[PBC_1966]

Fully understand this - regs can be a pain in the butt, but I suppose they are there for the reason to stop "have a go heros" bodging their way through.

The worst of the bodgers have no idea about them and blunder on regardless anyway. As has been noted already, the "Wiring Regulations" in BS7671 are not mandatory anyway, the only legal requirements being the rather ill-defined requirement to make "Reasonable provision for safety."

 

[stillp]

Surveyors haven't a clue anyway,

Fixed it for you

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Good, isn't it? But to some people. not falling foul of the holy grail of BS7671 takes precedence over making an immediate improvement by whatever means is practical at the time.

And to some people professionalism, competence, skill, expertise etc mean that there is never any valid reason to say "IDGAS" about complying with the regulations when they do work.

I do realise though, that for some degenerates who are only interested in getting in, and getting out, and getting the most money for the least work they can manage, this moral principle is alien to them.

 

[PBC_1966]

Give it a rest with your 500-ft. tall moral pedestal. We're not talking about a "bodge it & scarper" job, but about the pragmatic approach to improving an installation though it might not comply with one or two rules in BS7671 - Rules which are changing frequently anyway and which you, yourself, have claimed should be ignored on occasion.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Give it a rest with your 500-ft. tall moral pedestal.

Give it a rest with your constant carping about the regulations which you do because you just cannot stand the basic idea that there should be any.

We're not talking about a "bodge it & scarper" job, but about the pragmatic approach to improving an installation though it might not comply with one or two rules in BS7671

What we are talking about is approaching with the deliberate intent to look for ways to do the work without complying, rather than with the intention of complying. What we are talking about is people saying "Oh - I can't comply with that" when what they really mean is "I simply don't want to."

Rules which are changing frequently anyway

I would ask you to put forward an intelligent and logical explanation of why the fact that rules change is a valid reason to ignore them, but I fear that that would be totally beyond your abilities.

and which you, yourself, have claimed should be ignored on occasion.

Would it do any good to go over, again, the context of that? Or will you just carry on ignoring that, so that you can continue your nihilistic campaign against the regulations which is driven by your swivel-eyed opposition to the whole concept of there ever being any regulations whatsoever?