New shower cable

[rebuke]

With no RCD, nobody should sign a BS7671 certificate or self certify it to the LABC under Part P - they would be effectively committing fraud if they did so, since there is no way that work complies with BS7671 or Part P.

As has been said, what should be done is the tails should be split, and a separate mini CU, with an RCD and MCB in for the shower should be installed. That can then be tested regardless of the state of your existing CU (which incidentally I would recommend you get replaced at some point anyway, but that's a separate matter...). Hopefully the new cable is long enough that it can reach a separate CU, it might be possible to extend it if it isn't, although that's not really a nice thing to do on a cable of that size...

 

[ban-all-sheds]

There's a caveat though - to get the paperwork it will need testing, and this could reveal other problems like the CU.

1) It always needed testing.

2) It's only that circuit that needs testing, so as long as everything else associated with it complies then there will be no other problems to be revealed. Of course with no RCD it won't comply....

He could tell I wasn't happy, and I told him as much. I explained that my research had suggested that it was notifiable work because it wasn't simply replacement AND it is in the bathroom. He disagreed with that, but I suppose it comes down to interpretation.

No - the only way it could not be notifiable would be if the original cable was damaged. When I said "He could argue that the existing cable was damaged, and therefore the replacement of it wouldn't be notifiable" I meant he could easily claim that and get away with it, not that it was a truthful option.

There's no "interpretation" of the Building Regulations which makes installing a replacement circuit non-notifiable just because it's a replacement. Read Schedule 2B and see for yourself.

He also said that he wishes he hadn't taken it on. He wanted to do it because we're mates, but now realises that it can make things awkward. I agreed.

'twas ever thus.

Ultimately, he doesn't want to charge me until I'm happy. I've said that as long as the cable is going to stay in, then I'll happily pay for the installation of it. But, I want the whole job complete first with appropriate certificates in place.

Sounds fair.

He's probably in the same boat as someone who's recently passed their driving test - I remember my examiner telling me that the pass he was giving me didn't mean I knew how to drive, just that I'd reached a level where I was good enough to carry on learning by myself.

 

[roundthebend]

So, what'll happen?

He gets the other electrician to come around to certify his work. That guy says he can't because there's no RCD. So then I have to get someone to do the RCD and probably put a mini CU in too.

I guess I'll probably opt for getting a new CU installed. It'll save a load of hassle.


AND...just read Schedule 2B and I believe that it is hard to interpret it in any other way than "this job needed to be notified".

 

[Spark123]

Looking at the photo he has installed a 40A MCB to the far left of the CU. Did he have to modify the base to do this?

 

[roundthebend]

I believe the MCB is a straight replacement for the cartridge fuse holder. The legs are the same size and spacing.

It's only the covering plate that needed to be cut out.

 

[Spark123]

That is what I am saying - I don't think they are a straight swop. They maybe are the same spacing, but did he need to modify the base to make it fit in that position or is it sat at an angle?

 

[VanSolo]

Spark123 did you see the photo of the CU earlier in this thread?
It looks like the MCB and base have been fitted together as it appears to be orange.

 

[Spark123]

Yep, that is what I am commenting on.
Usually wylex fuses/MCBs of that type up to 32A have a normal base. As far as I am aware the 35A, 40A & 45A fuses/MCB bases (orange or green)have an extra keyway so can only be fitted in specific boards in a specific position.
That position in a compatable board is usually only the one position next to the main isolator.

 

[VanSolo]

Think you might be right there
On closer inspection of the photo it looks like it might not be in perfectly straight.

 

[tSpark]

He's under the impression that it is a replacement of the existing circuit and therefore doesn't need to be notified.

Replacement would be defined as like for like.
10 mm is not like 6mm
40amp type B MCB is not like a 30 amp rewireable

When he is assessed by Napit he needs to now basic knowledge like this

Oh and by the way Napit might question a job he registers with them.........When it was completed before he was registered with them!!

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Replacement would be defined as like for like.

No it wouldn't. People have been repeating that mistaken assertion for years, despite the fact that "like for like", or anything equivalent, does not appear anywhere in the Building Regulations.

10 mm is not like 6mm

So therefore it doesn't have to be.

40amp type B MCB is not like a 30 amp rewireable

But that is indeed notifiable, and so would a 30A MCB be.

 

[roundthebend]

As far as I am aware, only the fuse cover was modified in order to fit the MCB. I can't remember what colour the base was before so I can't comment.

The MCB sits nice and straight. So either it fits nicely, or there has been a modification to make it fit.



I spoke to him again this evening. He has asked another electrician who he has worked with in the past to come and do the tests and cert. This chap says that he won't be able to pass it (without even seeing it) because of the RCD issue. So, he's already suggested a new CU. I'll get him over to give us a quote.

Now.....shall I start a thread about installing my own CU?

 

[tSpark]

tSpark wrote:
Replacement would be defined as like for like.

No it wouldn't. People have been repeating that mistaken assertion for years, despite the fact that "like for like", or anything equivalent, does not appear anywhere in the Building Regulations

APPROVED DOCUMENT P The Building Regulations 2000

Page 10 Paragraph 1.9

Untitled

• tSpark
• 6 May 2009
• 1

Page 12 Paragraph 1.32

Untitled

• tSpark
• 6 May 2009
• 1

oh and page 22 of The Electricians guide to the Building Regulations under the heading
Additional notes from Approved Document P
Non notifiable

 

[Spark123]

Those documents are only guidance tho
The law is as BAS states - the law doesn't say like for like, it says " (b) replacing a damaged cable for a single circuit only"

 

[Spark123]

As far as I am aware, only the fuse cover was modified in order to fit the MCB. I can't remember what colour the base was before so I can't comment.

The MCB sits nice and straight. So either it fits nicely, or there has been a modification to make it fit.

If it was a 30A cartridge fuse then it would have been red, kick his backside if he has modded the base to fit!