And they can corrode.
I know little about this. Yes, there is certainly a degree of harmonisation, but the fact that there are fundamental differences (particularly between UK and the rest of Europe) as regards wiring practices, the same regs clearly can't apply Europe-wide. For example, ring final circuits and fused BS1363 plugs only exist in the UK.
Most installations wired prior to 2008 (and many wired subsequently!) are probably non-compliant with current regs in at least some details. However, there is generally no 'retrospective' requirement to upgrade things which were compliant with previous additions of the regs to make them compliant with current regs. As I understand it, the main issue arises when one 'does work on' a circuit (or part of a circuit) which is not compliant with current regs - in which case there is sometimes a requirement to bring it (certainly new bits of it) into compliance with current regs. As in most walks of life, if one went around with a fine toothcomb and a 'jobsworth' attitude, one could probably find at least some non-compliance with current regs, at some level of detail, in almost all electrical installations. The same may well be true of plumbing/gas/heating installations.
Indeed- and as someone else suggested, I would imagine that the solder in copper pipe joints will melt at temperatures very likely to be experienced in house fires and, indeed, at temperatures which quite probably are not all that much higher than the temperatures that would destroy a plastic pipe.
AIUI ...
That is certainly true.
Firstly, there obviously is no general requirement to make the installation compliant with current regs, if it were compliant when installed. However,if you did want something fully compliant with current regs, it probably could not be done with 'just' a single 'old' CU (even if it satisfied current requirements - e.g. IP-wise etc.). For example, some of the final circuits would almost certainly require 30mA RCD protection, but current regs also effectively 'prohibit' all final circuits being served by the same RCD. Whilst RCD protection could be added by an RCD external to the old CU, there would be a need for at least one other CU (or some equivalent), and perhaps a second RCD, to provide OPDs to serve other final circuits.
Yes, it's a totally different matter - although, as you say, in practice a modern CU would almost certainly be simpler and cheaper, if one wanted to end up with full compliance with current regs.
I suspect our knuckle-dragging plumber thinks that not replacing any you encounter is akin to leaving a cable with no cpc and a G/Y core used as a live conductor.
DIA: Didn't you agree 20 pages back that there was no more to be said on this topic?
As has been explained, the Wiring Regs appear to require a CPC for any fixed LV wiring, with the single explicit exception of the drop to a fully insulated lampholder in a pendant light. So the answer has to be 'yes'.
Strange how someone who has put me on ignore is still so concerned about what I might or might not be writing.yes mate, had to give bas time to scour the books in the loo, he's a bit senile now and reads very slowly.
Normally he would just copy and paste a dozen or so books but I think he may have forgotten how too.
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
