That's undoubtedly true from the point-of-view of an electrician etc. However, I doubt whether a lot of their customers would be so happy with the idea that things like JBs had to be 'in plain sight'!
There are certainly cases where one can see that an item exists, either with the MK1 eyeball or with the help of tools like mirrors or endoscope cameras but where to access it for inspection or maintenance would require destructive actions.if someone installs something electrical which is not "accessible for inspection and testing", then no-one is ever going to know what, if anything, has been installed
No.
Whilst what you say is literally true, I rather doubt that many inspectors go looking for 'hidden things' with mirrors and/or endoscopes and, even if they would like to do that, they would very often have to do some 'destruction' in order to be able to use such tools.
Are you saying that you would regard something as 'accessible' if you had to lift floor coverings and remove a floorboard to access it? If so, I think that there are a good few who would disagree.
Sure - "vive la difference"! However, I'm rather intrigued by the apparent 'breadth' of the variation of opinions between people!
OK, I'll take that as a 'yes', then.
I get this entirely and I'll be the first to believe some points of the regs are OTT while others are simply insuffifient, (such as using a bigger OCPD than the cable for heating elements/cookers etc) but all based on my experiences.
Those risks you mention are personal choices and (apart from the rescues services) affect ony themselves, risk due to electrical, gas, water etc issues affects everyone.It always amuses me when I hear smokers, heavy drinkers or those who spend their spare time climbing mountains expressing concern about some unbelievably small 'risk'
Kind Regards, John
I wasn't really thinking/writing specifically about the regs but, rather the considerable variation, in general, between people as regards their attitude to risk. Some people are, in general, extremely 'risk averse', and I have no problem with that, but most of us accept that one has to 'draw the line' somewhere, otherwise life becomes almost impossible.
That can certainly been true, but it's not really the point I was making (about the 'selective attitude to risk' which some people have, and which rather amuses me). If anything one might expect people to be more concerned about risks to themselves than to others, but some of those who have exercised high-risk lifestyle choices ('ignoring' that high risk) can get very concerned about incredibly small risks due to things which are not a matter of personal choice!
Oh yes, one only has to look at the way H&S is administered on building sites these days, especially large commercial buildings, I have many examples I can quote but one that really sticks in my mind was the total ban on ladders and stepladders, the alternative for step ladders being podium steps (I hope it's the right term). We had to access something in every floor of a cable riser, it took 2 of us half hour to create enough space in there to assemble it and then there was not enough space to get past it's steps to it's gate. Eventually site management arranged the scaffolders to build a platform which was time consuming due to the metal grill floor. We said they should wait while we do the job which was literally moving 2 wires along in the din rail terminals before moving on to the next floor... It took all day to move 2 wires on about 6 floors and tied up 2 scaffolders. It would have taken us less than an hour and been far easier for us and far more comfortable with a step ladder. If they had insisted we used the podium steps as was the initial instruction it would have indeed been impossible.
That may simply be because they don't have control on that aspect.
Quite so. I probably reported here a recent experience with a water company guy, who was working on a drain in the middle of our garden, some 20-30 metres from any building *(and them only houses). When I asked why he was wearing a hard hat to do it, he said that he would be sacked if anyone discovered that he hadn't been wearing it
Yes, maybe, but that still doesn't make any sense of the fact that they don't seem concerned about the very much higher risk that they do have control over, but have nevertheless chosen to 'accept without concern', does it?
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
it could say
