help needed

[ban-all-sheds]

However, as you're always saying when it comes to the law, unless there are ambiguities that need interpretion - which I don't believe there are), all that matters is what the law actually says, regardless of whether the intent of those who wrote it was something different. No?

Indeed, but that doesn't invalidate "The people who wrote the law say that it is notifiable". Nor does it affect the fact that in any event the circuits coming from the new CU are definitely, and explicitly, notifiable.

However, I'm still confused by your recent post, which seems to be contradictory.

Prior to this post I made 4:

//www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2875332#2875332

//www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2876534#2876534

//www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2876536#2876536

//www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2876732#2876732


Which do you think are contradictory?

 

[JohnW2]

It is a sad reflection that having worked with similar civil service clowns in the past double speak or double dutch is a required language. In clarifying their intentions about the new and replacement cu's and new circuits they promptly muddy the waters by stating.. "Our thinking was that installing a new consumer unit would always be linked with installing new circuits, and therefore it wasn't necessary to refer to new consumer unit in the list of notifiable works"
In the proposal above there is a new cu but not a new circuit so that 'clarification' fails and the work does not need to be notified.

Indeed so - but, also sadly, only too common a phenomenon. It seems a little odd that the person who wrote that letter did so because (s)he 'had been involved in preparing Approved Doc P' - since the issues, particularly about 'intentions', are not the fault of that Approved Document, which is merely quoting the law as it was (seemingly not very thoughtfully!) written!

The ridiculous thing is that I wouldn't mind betting that, given a clear understanding of 'the intentions', many of us here would have no difficulty in drafting wording for the law which made those intentions very clear and unambiguous, and even 'sensible'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

However, as you're always saying when it comes to the law, unless there are ambiguities that need interpretion - which I don't believe there are), all that matters is what the law actually says, regardless of whether the intent of those who wrote it was something different. No?

Indeed, but that doesn't invalidate "The people who wrote the law say that it is notifiable". Nor does it affect the fact that in any event the circuits coming from the new CU are definitely, and explicitly, notifiable.

As I've just observed in another post, that letter does not seem to come from (and hence be expressing the view of) someone who 'wrote the law' - but, rather, someone who was 'involved in' preparation of Approved Doc P - which, as we all know, is not law, and (in the context we're discussing) merely quotes the law, as written. Whatever, even if we did (which I don't think we do) know that the intent of those who wrote the law was something different from what they wrote, I think that is 'their problem' (only rectifiable by changing the law to correspond with their 'intent'), isn't it?

However, I'm still confused by your recent post, which seems to be contradictory.

Prior to this post I made 4: ... Which do you think are contradictory?

My apologies - please see edit of my earlier post. I thought that you, not riveralt, had written the post to which I was responding. It was therefore not a matter of inconsitency on your part but, rather, a difference between riveralt and yourself.

Kind Regards, John

 

[rickus19]

Ok, next question, i see that there are several different garage units ranging from 30a, 40a, 63a and 80a i think. I presume that i would get a 30a because thats what the cable is fused at at the main fusebox.

 

[Speakercon]

Ok, next question, i see that there are several different garage units ranging from 30a, 40a, 63a and 80a i think. I presume that i would get a 30a because thats what the cable is fused at at the main fusebox.

Aside from the other issues, don't get one of the cheap non-branded ones off ebay, their a load of rubbish and prone to failing to operate correctly.

 

[winston1]

You don't actually need an additional consumer unit in the shed anyway. The extra sockets can just be added using 4mm cable. If you want a light out there supply it via a switched fused connection unit with a 3amp or 5 amp fuse.