Define "reasonable expected"

[bernardgreen]

Regulations seem to requires RCD protection for any socket which can be "reasonable expected" to be used t oprovide power to equiment used in the garden ( or other outdoor areas ).

Given that there are people who are too stupid / ignorant to be able to reason. Surely it should be reasonable to consider that some people will plug a fan heater into a socket outside the bathroom and then place it by the bath to provide warmth as they get out of the bath.

So isn't reasonabale to RCD protect sockets within an extension leads reach of a bathroom ?

Bernard

Sharnbrook

 

[stem]

Personally I would reasonably expect that most homes in the UK have central heating and so people wouldn't need a fan heater for their bathrooms.

 

[davy_owen_88]

I think it's easier to RCD protect all sockets than it is to reason with people regarding their socket usage.

Davy

 

[ELZ4742]

as a design point of view there isnt much point NOT doing all the sockets on rcd. if you live in a 2 floor flat, i guess there isnt much reason to put the living room sockets on rcd if the bathrooms on the 2nd floor. but a pointless excersise none the less

 

[sm1thson]

i cant help but feel that there is some benefit to having all sockets (other than cookers fridges freezers etc) rcd protected even if they will be clearly never used outdoors, sure an electrical shock is much more likely to be fatal outdoors, and more likely to occur in the first place, but shocks indoors aren't nice and can still kill.

 

[Spark123]

You'll be glad to know the 17th edition looks as though it is going the way of RCD protection for all normal socket outlets.
Looks like it will be FSUs for fridges etc!

 

[securespark]

So isn't reasonabale to RCD protect sockets within an extension leads reach of a bathroom ?

Well, you could take the view that all sockets could supply equipment for use outdoors. In which case, that would include the sockets near the bathroom.

 

[kevnurse]

IMHO it is reasonable to only fit an RCD where the cable will most likely go outdoors and be subject to the weather, etc. They are a nuisance in a modern household that has the earth leaky gadgets but is also a house that has circuits that are safely used; ie the majority of the population.

If a pro lecky wants to protect himself from litigation following a rewire with minimal RCD protection he needs only to produce a piece of paper explaining what cables are now RCD protected and what the dangers are with misuse of the non-protected cables. "Granny, if you use an extension cable from your bedroom to power your hair drier in the bathroom you are outside the RCD safe zone and I will not be responsible." To me thats a reasonable approach to RCDs.

 

[RF Lighting]

Unfortunatly you have to make stuff idiot proof.

What happens when little Jimmy comes to pressure wash grannys patio for her and uses one of the non RCD sockets because granny has put a side board in front of the RCD socket?

You have to remember that people don't always appreciate the importance of an RCD.

 

[DESL]

If a pro lecky wants to protect himself from litigation following a rewire with minimal RCD protection he needs only to produce a piece of paper explaining what cables are now RCD protected and what the dangers are with misuse of the non-protected cables. "Granny, if you use an extension cable from your bedroom to power your hair drier in the bathroom you are outside the RCD safe zone and I will not be responsible." To me thats a reasonable approach to RCDs.

But Kev one small problem, you're talking common sense that went a long time ago along with personal responsibilty.

 

[kai]

The safe way is to run the fridge freezer off a 13amp fuse-connection unit fed off the non RCD protected side, and put the whole downstairs ring final circuit/and cooker control socket panel on the RCD side of the supply, and the shower unit too.

 

[JohnD]

better to have the cooker not on an RCD

and no socket on the cooker switch.

 

[davy_owen_88]

If a pro lecky wants to protect himself from litigation following a rewire with minimal RCD protection he needs only to produce a piece of paper explaining what cables are now RCD protected and what the dangers are with misuse of the non-protected cables. "Granny, if you use an extension cable from your bedroom to power your hair drier in the bathroom you are outside the RCD safe zone and I will not be responsible." To me thats a reasonable approach to RCDs.

Actually a piece of paper is not enough to protect pro sparks from blame. What's to stop that piece of paper getting lost? Who's going to make sure every person in the house reads it? Who's to say that piece of paper will make it's way to a new householder? Who's going to stop the average DIY'er from spurring from the non-RCD sockets and putting a new socket somewhere more likely to provide power to outdoor appliances? I could go on but I think I've made my point. 'Idiot proof' as RF said is the only way to make sure idiots don't injure themselves and then try to blame anyone they possibly can just to make a few bucks.

Davy

 

[ricicle]

RCD's on all socket outlets as far as I'm concerned.You are then protecting against dangerous shock from faulty appliances inside the E/zone also

 

[IJWS15]

In reality when legislation / regulations say "reasonable" it is the court which decides what is reasonable.

That is 12 people dragged off the street (actually summoned by letter and picked from a pool at the court) with no technical knowledge having the rights and wrongs explained to them by two barristers and a judge who then expects them to make a decision.

In the case of granny with a portable heater in the bathroom you are dependent on how many of the 12 think it is a normal thing to do!

Doesn't matter what we decide we think reasonable is - ultimately it is the jury!