Moving a light fitting - tell me why I'm being stupid.

[Twin Dad]

Hi All,

I have an 80's house, with 80's style spot lights pointing into 2no alcoves either side of a chimney breast. I'd like to replace these with wall lights in the alcoves.

The floor upstairs is T&G chipboard and I have not intention of disturbing it so I plan to work from below. I'm happy to cut holes in the plasterboard as I'm going to overboard the ceiling anyway and have it skimmed to cover the artex.

I know that I could/should take down the light fitting and connect everything up with a maintenance free junction box, extend the cables across the ceiling and chase them in down the wall and then connect them in to a new wall fitting. The jct box would be connected up like for like and the new wall fitting wiring would replace the current ceiling rose.

Now for the stupid bit. In my mind I don't see why the jct box can't be connected as a ceiling rose, with a single T&E cable run across the ceiling, down the wall and into the back of the new light fitting. The cable coming out of the jct box would essentially be like the cable coming out of a ceiling rose and into a light fitting. Connecting it up at the fitting would be simple. Less cable, less chasing, less effort. What's the catch?

Many thanks and please be gentle.

 

[Iggifer]

You mean the ceiling rose mounted on the ceiling, so you can see it? Or you want to hide it? Or with the rose as an actual light? Im confused.

Don't see how it would be any less cable though

 

[OwainDIYer]

the catch is the junction box will be inaccessible, which won't matter from a maintenance point of view (if you believe the maintenance-free claim) but may make it harder to extend or alter the wiring if you want more lights later.

If you mean the existing spot lights are where the lighting circuit is looped through with live, switched live, N and E, why not extend from the maintenance-free JB with triple+earth, then you can take both live and switched live down to the wall lights.

 

[Twin Dad]

Thanks guys for the quick response.

Owain, I take on board the point about future limitations and I hadn't thought to use triple and Earth. I'll consider that.

Iggifer, I'll try and explain another way - its not always easy on a forum.

Currently there is a ceiling rose where you would expect to find it, on the ceiling. I want to take this light down and replace it with a MF jct box in the void. I know that the "right" thing to do is extend all of the wires to the new fitting, thus extending the entire loop however I was thinking that using the jct box to mimic a ceiling rose and extending with a single twin and earth that would in effect be like a long piece of flex on a standard pendent. This would be a short cut but perhaps less work and disruption.

In the time I've posted this I'm already starting to see that there is a right way and wrong way to do these things and if it's a short cut then it probably shouldn't be done.

 

[Iggifer]

I'm following you now, I think. Correct me, but you see the two options as:
1) extend all of the cables to the new lighting position
2) replace the rose with a MF JB and just take one T+E to the new position

Correct?

There is a third option, but will require a little more chasing.

3) Extend and take Loop In & Loop out back to the switch position, then add new switch wires from there to the new light positions - this way you can have as many lights as you like, switched however you like, with some degree of future proofing.

There is nothing wrong with either 1 or 2, assuming the joints are well made, and documented (same goes for 3).

If either of the loop in / out cables reaches the switch (they may as you'll likely be pulling them back to the doorway) even better

 

[Twin Dad]

Thanks Iggifer.

You do understand me correctly. Good to know both options would work.

I'm not keen on 3 as I'd like to keep chasing to a minimum. Right now we're skimming the ceiling and maybe the backs of the alcoves. Option 3 would means work on a separate much larger wall which I'd like to keep untouched.

 

[Iggifer]

That's fair enough. Either option will work then, just make sure you wire all the lights. You could use 3C+E as mentioned to take a permanent live to the wall lights, but unless you end up changing them for ones with an integrated switch, I can't see the benefit myself.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The floor upstairs is T&G chipboard and I have not intention of disturbing it.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=solid+board+cutter

 

[Twin Dad]

Hadn't even considered that I may want individual switches on the lights. Good point.

Will cutting out the T&G be easier than working from below given I'm over-boarding the ceiling anyway? I'd seen these cutters for my trend router but the drill mounted ones look far more cost effective. Thanks.

 

[333rocky333]

Now for the stupid bit. In my mind I don't see why the jct box can't be connected as a ceiling rose, with a single T&E cable

Thats proberly the main reason Hagar MF boxes have 4 sets lof terminals

 

[OwainDIYer]

Hadn't even considered that I may want individual switches on the lights. Good point.

You almost certainly will. Bear in mind that wall lights in the alcoves will be shining into the room, and if these are the only lights then the chimney breast will appear dark as it will be in shadow. Possibly put the lights up temporarily on flex, and get Management's approval, before final positioning.

If you don't want to chase the wall with the light switch on you can use wireless switches. You would then need permanent live to the receivers.

https://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/LMEST1.html

 

[Twin Dad]

More valid points Owain. Thanks.

We're fortunate that our neighbors' house is a mirror image of our own so we have an idea what the lights will look like as they already have the alcoves lit. There is also a central pendent light in the room. If we want things bright we would use the main light but wanted something with a fairly low output to put on when we neither want to sit in the dark or under a floodlight.

I don't know anything about wireless switches and I don't think I'd jump to introducing so many new ways that the system can fail when I have traditional methods that would work for me. It's certainly worth knowing this exists for the future though. I really just need to decide if I go with the "proper" solution or the "short-cut" and if I go for the short cut, do I take (the very sensible) suggestion of using triple and earth rather than twin.

Very useful comments, thanks all.

 

[Taylortwocities]

I'd go with the board cutter.
Cutting holes in Artex can have certain risks
http://www.hse.gov.uk/asbestos/essentials/coatings.htm

 

[Twin Dad]

I thought I'd be OK on that front since the white stuff in artex was banned in 1985 and the house was built in 1987. Was it not that clear-cut?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If you were a subbie/self-employed plasterer, would you necessarily have binned any old bags of Artex which you had?

But I wasn't thinking of that - just the comparative ease of kneeling down to work under a floor than reaching up to work above a ceiling.