Need to add a socket, advice please?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsored Links
I think I've got a box of them in the loft.
 
Sponsored Links
It wouldn't be unsafe, and would be just as safe as all the other sockets in the house at the moment. Even if you wanted to comply with the current edition of BS7671, that would not require you to change all the other sockets to 30mA RCD protection, only to provide it for the new one. There must still be hundreds of thousands of homes across the U.K. which have no RCD protection on sockets whatsoever; while adding RCD protection might add a level of safety, that doesn't mean that they're unsafe without it. You already have a higher degree of RCD protection through that main 100mA device than those.
Be that as it may, the ONLY advice which can be given is that the current edition of the Wiring Regulations is the one to be followed, and the current law obeyed.
 
Thanks guys. One more question. If I were to upgrade my fusebox to the new standards i.e. change the trip threshold from 100mA to 30mA, would I have to replace the whole fusebox or just one part (such as a fuse)? Would it be costly?

I would much prefer such a centralised solution, for many reasons - costs, aesthetics, peace of mind, freedom of choice...

I'll be starting a loft conversion soon (not DIY, a specialised company, and Building Control will be involved) and I don't like the idea of having two types of sockets in the house - the old lightweight ones and the new 'loaded' ones.
 
Thanks guys. One more question. If I were to upgrade my fusebox to the new standards i.e. change the trip threshold from 100mA to 30mA, would I have to replace the whole fusebox or just one part (such as a fuse)? Would it be costly?
The whole thing. Depends on your idea of "costly".

But.....

I'll be starting a loft conversion soon (not DIY, a specialised company, and Building Control will be involved)
Assuming that you are going to have lights in it, and sockets, and want the cables to be concealed then you will not be able to have any of that put onto your existing CU. So in practical terms it will have to be replaced, either before the loft conversion is done or as part of it, unless you want a separate CU just for the loft.

You could get quotes for a replacement, and then ask the loft company to quote for adding a replacement into their work. (I assume they employ or use a proper electrician?).
 
Be that as it may, the ONLY advice which can be given is that the current edition of the Wiring Regulations is the one to be followed, and the current law obeyed.
And what does the current law demand? Only that the work be "reasonably safe." As you are well aware, it does not require compliance with the latest edition of BS7671 (or any edition for that matter). Your statement is likely to be taken as suggesting that the law can be satisfied only by following every detail of the current edition of BS7671, which you know is not true.

As for advice, I believe it should be offered in the spirit of explaining the options and offering solutions which are reasonable given the current situation and the inquirer's intent, how much he wants to spend, etc. I already acknowledged that if one wishes to comply fully with the current edition of BS7671 then the new socket would need 30mA RCD protection. But what is wrong with pointing out that there is nothing unsafe about the 100mA protection which is already in place, and that there's no requirement to follow BS7671 if happy to just add the socket with 100mA protection? Or to point out that just a few years ago this was the accepted norm and that even those who always insist on following the current edition of BS7671 to the letter would have happily installed it and declared it perfectly safe?

I don't like the idea of having two types of sockets in the house - the old lightweight ones and the new 'loaded' ones.
What do you mean by "lightweight" and "loaded" sockets?
 
Assuming that you are going to have lights in it, and sockets, and want the cables to be concealed then you will not be able to have any of that put onto your existing CU. So in practical terms it will have to be replaced, either before the loft conversion is done or as part of it, unless you want a separate CU just for the loft.

You could get quotes for a replacement, and then ask the loft company to quote for adding a replacement into their work. (I assume they employ or use a proper electrician?).
Yes, I'm going to have a bedroom and shower room in the loft and the wiring will be concealed. I'll ask them about replacing the CU.

By the way, I've recently had my electric meter replaced. Since then, the CU has tripped on a few occasions when I have isolated a circuit to work on it, e.g. to replace a light switch. Presumably this is not the desired behaviour and something's wrong here?
It never happened with the old meter.

What do you mean by "lightweight" and "loaded" sockets?
Lightweight = ordinary sockets that are just sockets and nothing else
'Loaded' = sockets loaded with extra features, such as built-in RCD
 
Be that as it may, the ONLY advice which can be given is that the current edition of the Wiring Regulations is the one to be followed, and the current law obeyed.
And what does the current law demand? Only that the work be "reasonably safe." As you are well aware, it does not require compliance with the latest edition of BS7671 (or any edition for that matter). Your statement is likely to be taken as suggesting that the law can be satisfied only by following every detail of the current edition of BS7671, which you know is not true.
Is this Dodge City? Are there other cowboys here?

I am aware of what the law requires (and unlike you I do care about it). And I have not suggested that it can be satisfied only by following every detail of the current edition of BS7671. Although unlike you I can think of no good reason not to encourage people to do that. I can think of bad ones, which are probably all the ones you have, seeing as you are an unacceptable, irresponsible, disgusting little (**&"^%$&#@.


As for advice, I believe it should be offered in the spirit of explaining the options and offering solutions which are reasonable given the current situation and the inquirer's intent, how much he wants to spend, etc.
No - you believe it is an opportunity to recruit more people to your cowboy gang.


I already acknowledged that if one wishes to comply fully with the current edition of BS7671 then the new socket would need 30mA RCD protection. But what is wrong with pointing out that there is nothing unsafe about the 100mA protection
Would the fact that it's a lie do?


and that there's no requirement to follow BS7671 if happy to just add the socket with 100mA protection?
That would be illegal. 100mA is not reasonably safe.


Or to point out that just a few years ago this was the accepted norm
When was a 100mA RCD the accepted norm for sockets?


and that even those who always insist on following the current edition of BS7671 to the letter would have happily installed it and declared it perfectly safe?
Why can you not get it into your head that things change? The way you cling to the past, with your "it were good enough when I were a lad" attitude is pathetic.
 
Yes, I'm going to have a bedroom and shower room in the loft and the wiring will be concealed.
Then I suggest you ignore all the nonsense from PBC about the technicalities of complying with the law without taking any notice of the Wiring Regulations. Unless you want a huge fight with Building Control on your hands, to the extent of risking not getting a completion certificate from them, and unless you want to find it all but impossible to get an electrician, you've got no choice but to have the work done in compliance with the current version of the Wiring Regulations.

PBC hates that reality, with a vengeance, and becomes almost deranged in his attempts to persuade people away from it - even to the extent as we saw above to lying to them about safety. He would risk peoples lives to make his point.


By the way, I've recently had my electric meter replaced. Since then, the CU has tripped on a few occasions when I have isolated a circuit to work on it, e.g. to replace a light switch. Presumably this is not the desired behaviour and something's wrong here?
It never happened with the old meter.
It's nothing to do with the meter. Isolating a circuit by turning off the MCB does not disconnect the neutral, only line, so if you happen to make a contact between N & earth the RCD will trip. It may not be desirable, but there's nothing wrong. If it never happened before the meter change then either you never accidentally made that connection, or you had no earth before and they sorted that without telling you when the meter was changed.
 
Lightweight = ordinary sockets that are just sockets and nothing else
'Loaded' = sockets loaded with extra features, such as built-in RCD
Ah, got you.

I am aware of what the law requires (and unlike you I do care about it).
I care about an electrical installation being reasonably safe, which is all that English law demands.

And I have not suggested that it can be satisfied only by following every detail of the current edition of BS7671. Although unlike you I can think of no good reason not to encourage people to do that. I can think of bad ones, which are probably all the ones you have, seeing as you are an unacceptable, irresponsible, disgusting little (**&"^%$&#@.
Ever the response of somebody who can offer no other reasonable argument - Resort to insults.

I already acknowledged that if one wishes to comply fully with the current edition of BS7671 then the new socket would need 30mA RCD protection. But what is wrong with pointing out that there is nothing unsafe about the 100mA protection
Would the fact that it's a lie do?
No, because it isn't. Are you seriously suggesting that a socket with 100mA is unsafe just because it's protected by a 100mA and not a 30mA one?

and that there's no requirement to follow BS7671 if happy to just add the socket with 100mA protection?
That would be illegal. 100mA is not reasonably safe.
Nonsense. Our standard GFCI's here provide protection to 5mA, which is obviously better than 30mA. Should I try to claim that 30mA RCD protection is therefore unsafe?

When was a 100mA RCD the accepted norm for sockets?
When it was standard for whole-house protection, as in the OP's case.

Why can you not get it into your head that things change? The way you cling to the past, with your "it were good enough when I were a lad" attitude is pathetic.
Just because what is done as standard today has changed does not automatically render something done only a few years ago as being dangerous.

And when "I were a lad," in the areas in which I lived you'd have been hard pressed to find any socket with earth-fault protection of any sort beyond a BS3036 fuse.

PBC hates that reality, with a vengeance, and becomes almost deranged in his attempts to persuade people away from it - even to the extent as we saw above to lying to them about safety. He would risk peoples lives to make his point.
Where have a lied about safety? I acknowledged that 30mA protection provides an extra level of safety. That does not mean that the existing 100mA protection is unsafe.
 
By the way, I've recently had my electric meter replaced. Since then, the CU has tripped on a few occasions when I have isolated a circuit to work on it, e.g. to replace a light switch. Presumably this is not the desired behaviour and something's wrong here?
It never happened with the old meter.

It's nothing to do with the meter. Isolating a circuit by turning off the MCB does not disconnect the neutral, only line, so if you happen to make a contact between N & earth the RCD will trip. It may not be desirable, but there's nothing wrong. If it never happened before the meter change then either you never accidentally made that connection, or you had no earth before and they sorted that without telling you when the meter was changed.

Refer to RF's video about loose tails causing RCD to trip.
 
Ever the response of somebody who can offer no other reasonable argument - Resort to insults.
You may feel insulted by that, in the same way that King Salman of Saudi Arabia feels insulted when people call him an odious tyrant, but I did not say it to insult you - I said it to express to you my opinion of your awful behaviour.


No, because it isn't. Are you seriously suggesting that a socket with 100mA is unsafe just because it's protected by a 100mA and not a 30mA one?
I'm saying it is not as safe, and therefore it is a lie to say that there is nothing unsafe about it.


Nonsense. Our standard GFCI's here provide protection to 5mA, which is obviously better than 30mA. Should I try to claim that 30mA RCD protection is therefore unsafe?
This is here, not there.

It is no longer reasonable to use 100mA RCD protection for new sockets because putting in 30mA is a reasonable thing to so. It follows, therefore that not doing so is not reasonable, and therefore unlawful.


When it was standard for whole-house protection, as in the OP's case.
It's been more than 10 years since it was 30mA for supplementary protection.


Just because what is done as standard today has changed does not automatically render something done only a few years ago as being dangerous.
It renders it automatically deprecated, it renders it automatically obsolete, it renders it automatically non-compliant and it renders it automatically no longer to be advised to be done.


And when "I were a lad," in the areas in which I lived you'd have been hard pressed to find any socket with earth-fault protection of any sort beyond a BS3036 fuse.
Yes.

But things change.

You are dangerous, unhelpful, and despite all your protestations about what the law "only" requires you have no interest in it being obeyed, and you take every opportunity to encourage people to flout it, all because you don't like it and because you don't like the fact that regulations change. You make me sick.


Where have a lied about safety? I acknowledged that 30mA protection provides an extra level of safety. That does not mean that the existing 100mA protection is unsafe.
It means it is not as safe, and therefore it means that more people are likely to be harmed by relying on it, and more people will tend to die by relying on it.
 
I'm saying it is not as safe, and therefore it is a lie to say that there is nothing unsafe about it.
The fact that "A" may offer increased safety over "B" does not automatically mean that "B" is unsafe. "B" can still be considered reasonably safe even if "A" offers a greater level of safety.

And if you really want to try and argue that any slight risk with something implies that it's a lie to say that there is nothing unsafe about it, I would suggest you consider that even with 30mA RCD protection there is still risk. A sustained shock of under 30mA can still be dangerous - even fatal - in some circumstances, not to mention that no RCD protects against L-N shock no matter whether it's 30mA, 100mA or anything else. The only way to completely remove all risk would be to have a system which is incapable of actually doing anything useful in the way of supplying power.

Nonsense. Our standard GFCI's here provide protection to 5mA, which is obviously better than 30mA. Should I try to claim that 30mA RCD protection is therefore unsafe?
This is here, not there.
I await with interest your explanation of how the American milliamp differs from the British milliamp.

It is no longer reasonable to use 100mA RCD protection for new sockets because putting in 30mA is a reasonable thing to so. It follows, therefore that not doing so is not reasonable, and therefore unlawful.
That is not what "reasonably safe" means. By your logic I could argue that your advice to install a 30mA RCD socket is not reasonable and would therefore be illegal because you could use one of these instead:

https://www.mkelectric.com/en-my/Pr...ocketoutlets/RCDprotected/Pages/K6211WHI.aspx

When it was standard for whole-house protection, as in the OP's case.
It's been more than 10 years since it was 30mA for supplementary protection.
And the Wylex board and 100mA RCD in the OP's picture are clearly older than that. And 10 years ago was 2005, not exactly the dark ages of electrical safety.

Just because what is done as standard today has changed does not automatically render something done only a few years ago as being dangerous.
It renders it automatically deprecated, it renders it automatically obsolete, it renders it automatically non-compliant and it renders it automatically no longer to be advised to be done.
But it does not render it no longer reasonably safe.

You are dangerous, unhelpful, and despite all your protestations about what the law "only" requires you have no interest in it being obeyed, and you take every opportunity to encourage people to flout it, all because you don't like it and because you don't like the fact that regulations change. You make me sick.
There you go with tirade again. I have nowhere suggested that Otorongo flouts the law, and would not in any way encourage anybody to do something which I would not regard as being reasonably safe. You seem to have a very twisted interpretation of what "reasonable" and "reasonably" mean in the context in which they are being used here. The regulations, as you well know are not law, albeit that calling them "regulations" suggests that to many people.

If you genuinely believe that sockets with 100mA protection are not reasonably safe, then where is your advice that the OP really needs to get that "fixed" immediately? You seem to be quite happy with adding a 30mA RCD socket and leaving everything else as it is for now.

It means it is not as safe, and therefore it means that more people are likely to be harmed by relying on it, and more people will tend to die by relying on it.
Right, so you're obviously quite happy to advise the use of 30mA RCD protection, even though it's clearly not as safe asusing the 10mA device I referred to above. Doesn't that mean that more people are likely to be harmed by relying on your advice to use 30mA than if you had advised the use of 10mA protection?

Otorongo, I'm sorry this appears to have sunk to this level. I was merely trying to offer pragmatic advice that realistically there is nothing inherently unsafe about the 100mA RCD protection you have, even though the modern standard is for 30mA, and that, also realistically, adding one more socket with 100mA protection to a house which is already full of such sockets is not in any way anything I would be concerned about. If you were to just add the "lightweight" socket now, your printer (and you when using it) will be just as safe as wherever you have it plugged in at the moment.

As you're planning major extension works in the future, that may well involve fitting a new unit if only to provide for extra circuits, and at that time you could bring the RCD-protection to current BS7671 standards. If you get an electrician in to do that later with the extension work neither he nor your local building control are going to care one jot that you added a socket on the existing 100mA-protected circuit, assuming that you even tell them or they notice.
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

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

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top