MSF100 Switch fuses and amended regs

[JohnW2]

Because installation standards are the prerogative of individual nations? Technically it would be legal, but how would you demonstrate compliance with Part P for a CU that did not appear to conform to BS7671?

How about by indicating that it did appear to conform with the regulations in some other specified European country?

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

I'm not sure that would be seen as relevant, let alone sufficient.

 

[JohnW2]

I'm not sure that would be seen as relevant, let alone sufficient.

Perhaps, but Approved Document P talks in terms of using compliance with BS7671 as being an acceptable way complying with Part P, and, in turn, BS7671 seems to say that one can work to other alternative sets of national regulations.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

Yes, they do, but try getting that past an insurance company's engineer!

 

[JohnW2]

Yes, they do, but try getting that past an insurance company's engineer!

Maybe, but you're now introducing a new dimension. Insurance company's are obviously free to require standards which go beyond what is required to satisfy the Building Regs if they so wish.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

Well, I have no experience of dealing with Building Control, but I can't imagine they can 'think out of the box' either.

 

[JohnW2]

Well, I have no experience of dealing with Building Control, but I can't imagine they can 'think out of the box' either.

I can well imagine that such is true, so it might not be straightforward but, in the final analysis, they could be forced to do a bit of thinking, even if only because they were being told that they would have to explain their reasoning/argument to a Court!

Of course, if they were capable of thinking, they might already be wondering why a plastic CU is 'safe' in, say, a fish and chip shop or children's home, but is a 'fire risk' in my house

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Because installation standards are the prerogative of individual nations? Technically it would be legal, but how would you demonstrate compliance with Part P for a CU that did not appear to conform to BS7671?

By pointing out that if it is legally on sale here, and if it is OK to install in 27 other advanced Western countries it cannot be unreasonable to install it here.

 

[stillp]

By pointing out that if it is legally on sale here, and if it is OK to install in 27 other advanced Western countries it cannot be unreasonable to install it here.

But, it is only OK to install in 27 countries as part of an installation that meets their local standards and regulations. Those standards and regulations are the responsibility of each individual member state.

 

[JohnW2]

But, it is only OK to install in 27 countries as part of an installation that meets their local standards and regulations. Those standards and regulations are the responsibility of each individual member state.

True, but does not the national 'standard and regulations' in our member state (BS7671) somewhere indicate that compliance with other standards/regulations are an acceptable alternative to compliance with BS7671?

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

...but it's not our local standards that require the fusing down; just the manufacturers when they send it to Britain.

 

[JohnW2]

...but it's not our local standards that require the fusing down; just the manufacturers when they send it to Britain.

Indeed - but our local standards require that 'attention be paid' to MIs, and TTC is suggesting (I think in a different thread) that many people (including most DIYers) do not have the knowledge/skill which would enable them to do anything other than 'go along with' what the MIs said.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

True, but does not the national 'standard and regulations' in our member state (BS7671) somewhere indicate that compliance with other standards/regulations are an acceptable alternative to compliance with BS7671?

Kind Regards, John

Perhaps, but does BS7671 or JPEL/64 have the authority to interpret UK or other countries' law?

 

[stillp]

oes not the national 'standard and regulations' in our member state (BS7671) somewhere indicate that compliance with other standards/regulations are an acceptable alternative to compliance with BS7671?

I'm sure you're right, but where is that?

 

[JohnW2]

I'm sure you're right, but where is that?

I'm pretty sure, as well (the concept is quite often cited by posters here), but I'm currently separated from my BYB and therefore can't check at the moment. I'm certainly sure that there is something like that somewhere - if not in BS7671 (although I think it is), maybe in Approved Doc P?

Kind Regards, John