Continuity test

[EFLImpudence]

Plus there is too much confusion -

Round the ring, separating the line terminals from the back of a socket..

"Line" is the term used for what most people call the "live".
Are you separating all the cables and measuring Brown to Brown, Blue to Blue and Earth to Earth?

They havent been fitted the wiring has been through crimped and wrapped in insulation tape and the wires for the faceplates are in electrical connecters and then wrapped fully in electrical tape

Which wires have been crimped and where are they?
One could have been incorrectly terminated leading to the result you "say" you have.

 

[JohnW2]

I think the process is called "First Fix"! In case you aren't sure, First Fix is ....

Yes, I'm well familiar with 'First Fix', but only really in the context of a new build, a re-wire as part of a major refurb or, at least, a completely new circuit (installed when refurb were being undertaken). It seemed, at least to me, strange that the same concept should be applied to the extension of a (seemingly 'being used') existing circuit. However, you seem to be suggesting that it isn't 'strange', so fair enough.

Anyway, do you agree with me about the rest of what I said? To use your language, perhaps I should say that the electrician who undertook the 'first fix' of this circuit extension should be asked to also undertake the 'second fix' (including testing). Even if we were confident that we fully understand what the OP has been doing/measuring, even if we did I'm far from convinced that he would be able to rectify any problems he identified.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Taylortwocities]

As you know, my typed reply was tongue in cheek. But, yes, I agree with what you said.

My guess is that the fault was there before. This would gave been flagged if even basic testing had been carried out on the circuit before and after the new work was carried out. All dead tests should have been done, with live and functional tests once the sockets are fitted.
Even a half capable electrician should be able to determine where the problem lies relatively quickly. Maybe it’s time the OP employed one.

 

[kevinsmbuk]

I think the question which people are raising is why on earth the sockets (faceplates) were not intstalled at the time the circuit was extended - since to do that would have taken no longer than putting the conductors into 'connectors'.

Whatever, the 'qualified electrician' who extended the circuit should have tested the circuit after that work, and it sounds as if he probably didn't. Particularly since, as is the case, you have doubts/concerns about the integrity of the circuit, you really should ask him to undertake the testing he should have done in the first place (and rectify any faults), rather than trying to do it, and interpret the results, yourself.

Kind Regards, John

Simply because I didn't choose which faceplates I wanted at the time, I now have those but the 3rd bedroom is not a priority, so thats why I havent installed them yet myself

 

[JohnW2]

Simply because I didn't choose which faceplates I wanted at the time, I now have those but the 3rd bedroom is not a priority, so thats why I havent installed them yet myself

Fair enough, but that doesn't alter the fact that whoever worked on (extended) the circuit, should have tested it (and rectified any problems detected), faceplates or no faceplates - which is why I have suggested that you should ask him to do that, now.

If you had asked a friend, who was a 'qualified mechanic', to do some work on the brakes of you car, would you really expect him to allow you to drive the car away without first testing and confirming that the brakes actually worked after he had completed the job?

Kind Regards, John

 

[kevinsmbuk]

Yes, I'm well familiar with 'First Fix', but only really in the context of a new build, a re-wire as part of a major refurb or, at least, a completely new circuit (installed when refurb were being undertaken). It seemed, at least to me, strange that the same concept should be applied to the extension of a (seemingly 'being used') existing circuit. However, you seem to be suggesting that it isn't 'strange', so fair enough.

Anyway, do you agree with me about the rest of what I said? To use your language, perhaps I should say that the electrician who undertook the 'first fix' of this circuit extension should be asked to also undertake the 'second fix' (including testing). Even if we were confident that we fully understand what the OP has been doing/measuring, even if we did I'm far from convinced that he would be able to rectify any problems he identified.

Kind Regards, John

If the circuit has dropped a live somewhere, I can't see it being that hard to rectify or am I missing something?

 

[kevinsmbuk]

As you know, my typed reply was tongue in cheek. But, yes, I agree with what you said.

My guess is that the fault was there before. This would gave been flagged if even basic testing had been carried out on the circuit before and after the new work was carried out. All dead tests should have been done, with live and functional tests once the sockets are fitted.
Even a half capable electrician should be able to determine where the problem lies relatively quickly. Maybe it’s time the OP employed one.

I will ask my friend what the readings where at the time on the consumer unit install, he is more than capable. Just because he is a friend doesn't mean he is dodgy!

 

[JohnW2]

If the circuit has dropped a live somewhere, I can't see it being that hard to rectify or am I missing something?

As has been said, if no testing has been done previously (or for a long time), it's possible that a fault has existed for many years - maybe a break in a cable or a problem in some hidden junction box etc.). In such situations, it could be difficult to locate and rectify the source of the problem.

Kind Regards, John

 

[kevinsmbuk]

Fair enough, but that doesn't alter the fact that whoever worked on (extended) the circuit, should have tested it (and rectified any problems detected), faceplates or no faceplates - which is why I have suggested that you should ask him to do that, now.

If you had asked a friend, who was a 'qualified mechanic', to do some work on the brakes of you car, would you really expect him to allow you to drive the car away without first testing and confirming that the brakes actually worked after he had completed the job?

Kind Regards, John

Agreed.

 

[JohnW2]

I will ask my friend what the readings where at the time on the consumer unit install, he is more than capable. Just because he is a friend doesn't mean he is dodgy!

He might not be dodgy in a number of respects, but if he did work on a circuit and then walked away without testing it, it could be said that that was a little on the dodgy side. In fact, I would say that he really should have tested the circuit before extending it, as well, to detect any pre-existing problems.

Kind Regards, John

 

[kevinsmbuk]

Plus there is too much confusion -


"Line" is the term used for what most people call the "live".
Are you separating all the cables and measuring Brown to Brown, Blue to Blue and Earth to Earth?


Which wires have been crimped and where are they?
One could have been incorrectly terminated leading to the result you "say" you have.

I refer to line, as live. Yes I am measuring in this way too.

I can kill the circuit and take a photo if you like?

 

[JohnW2]

I will ask my friend what the readings where at the time on the consumer unit install...

I forgot to add that, interesting though the answer to that question might be, it won't really help you, since we want to know what is the state of the circuit now - and if it is anything like you have been describing, one can but hope that it wasn't like that when (if) it was tested at the time of the CU change!

Kind Regards, John

 

[kevinsmbuk]

He might not be dodgy in a number of respects, but if he did work on a circuit and then walked away without testing it, it could be said that that was a little on the dodgy side. In fact, I would say that he really should have tested the circuit before extending it, as well, to detect any pre-existing problems.

Kind Regards, John

It's very possible he did, I think everyone is jumping to the conclusion he didn't before me asking him.

 

[JohnW2]

It's very possible he did, I think everyone is jumping to the conclusion he didn't before me asking him.

Well, IF he did test after the extension and found everything was OK, and IF the present situation is what you have been describing, then you would need to think about what you have done (or what has been done) since that circuit extension which could have brought about the change.

Kind Regards, John

 

[kevinsmbuk]

I forgot to add that, interesting though the answer to that question might be, it won't really help you, since we want to know what is the state of the circuit now - and if it is anything like you have been describing, one can but hope that it wasn't like that when (if) it was tested at the time of the CU change!

Kind Regards, John

Yes thats true, it would be handy to know, the CU was changed then the ring circuit extended. Since he done that I extended the ring in the second bedroom (overseen by another friend who is a qualified electrician) about three JB's were removed and wiring was run from socket to socket instead. Then in the first bedroom I have removed a spur off the socket in question which fed an FCU which fed a double socket in the same bedroom, whilst the other cable from the FCU went downstairs to another double socket and terminated there.