Temporary Electrical Repairs

[Starspark1]

Do you actually work on electrical installations?

Have you ever been faced with a loss of power at 10pm with kids in bed and a homeowner panicing about the freezer defrosting and the boiler not working?

It's great following the regs to the letter of the law, and in an ideal world that's what we'd all do, but unfortunately when you get out there in the real world doing real jobs for real customers, sometimes you have to use your judgement and not follow regulations.

All we are talking about is leaving a circuit off RCD, something which is permitted by the regs if the sockets sre for use by instructed persons, and you can instruct the homeowner to what is safe usage until the fault can be repaired.

Yes and i have been faced with this many times how about you?

Nobody is telling you that you must comply with the regulations (I assume bs7671?) We are talking about the EAWR (The law).

Your forgetting that this is not simply removing RCD protection from a healthy circuit its removing RCD protection from a faulty circuit (hence the reason why it was tripping).

In the worst case scenario if you are not able to find the fault then i feel isolating the faulty circuit and supplying a temporary socket if you must or use an extension lead for essential items is adequate.

I fail to see what your defence would be in accordance with reg 29 of the EAWR if someone was injured as a result of this faulty circuit.

Worst Worst Worst case scenario what do people do in the even of a DNO failure? I think compensation for loss of food etc would be a lot less than an electric shock etc compensation claim.

If you are unsure about this maybe you should ring your approve body and see how they feel about your thoughts.

 

[sparkwright]

RF is quite right of course.

When under such pressure if time is running out you may have to resort to such measures.

So late in the day one cannot help but think what was allowed years ago, so that seems to count as reassurance when making a temporary repair.

For peace of mind the repair should be carried out the very next day.

Telling the customer not to use certain things can be helpful, if you believe him.

Sometimes this is a very difficult job, and carrying out work to very letter of the regulations can be a complete ****.

 

[Starspark1]

Well it is. You've still got overcurrent protection for the circuit, and whist theoretically possible in a vanishingly small chance (like all your threads seem to end up with) there could be a fire, that is a risk I may willing to take, because my knowledge, judgement and experience will allow to make an assesment as to whether it's safe to do so as a temporary measure.

Maybe it's because you are not practicing in this field that you don't have the experience to know how little risk this temporary fix has actually exposed the electrician and the homeowners to.

Do you not understand that BS7671 is designed to protect persons/livestock against electric shock etc/property damage/fire?

Most safety factors in bs7671 are based on risks/hazards that are of a very small possibility but we work in accordance with this all the same. So for you to turn round and say that in the very unlikely even that a fire would happen is very contradictory considering you design/construct/test and inspect in accordance with bs7671.

I suppose you would be quite happy to install a shower pullswitch in zone 1 as you and me both know its very unlikely that a user would receive an electric shock from it?

 

[Starspark1]

RF is quite right of course.

When under such pressure if time is running out you may have to resort to such measures.

So late in the day one cannot help but think what was allowed years ago, so that seems to count as reassurance when making a temporary repair.

For peace of mind the repair should be carried out the very next day.

Telling the customer not to use certain things can be helpful, if you believe him.

Sometimes this is a very difficult job, and carrying out work to very letter of the regulations can be a complete ****.

You cant break the law because your under pressure.

You cant break the law because its 10 at night.

You cant break the law because your tired.

You cant break the law because you used to do it.

Read EAWR regulations.

Not saying you in particular but others cant quote regs all day long but then contravene them when they feel like it and/or are tired and under pressure.

 

[JohnW2]

.... that is a risk I may willing to take, because my knowledge, judgement and experience will allow to make an assesment as to whether it's safe to do so as a temporary measure.

That's fine then, and your prerogative, and I assume you're implying that your insurers and scheme operator would support you in that decision? Just to be pedantic, you would not be making an assessment that it was 'safe' but, rather, that the probability of it proving unsafe (i.e. something nasty resulting) was extremely small.

Maybe it's because you are not practicing in this field that you don't have the experience to know how little risk this temporary fix has actually exposed the electrician and the homeowners to.

I realise that it's an extremely small risk. However, since very small risks are very small, I would suggest that, even as a practising electrician, you'd have to have many lifetimes of experience before you really could get a handle on the actual level of risk. A disaster which occured only once in every 1,000 times that particular temporary fix was effected would undoubtedly be regarded as unacceoptable, yet you'd presumably need many lifetimes of practice to effect that particular temporary fix 1,000 times or more.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[sparkwright]

I would say it's fairly likely to recieve a shock from a pull switch contained somewhere in zone 1, and wouldn't do it - and can't see much reason to even temporarily do it.

As far as temporary or even permanent repairs go, sockets are often more important than sockets generally.

Installing things things is one thing, temporary repairs are another.

 

[RMS]

I would say it's fairly likely to recieve a shock from a pull switch contained somewhere in zone 1, and wouldn't do it - and can't see much reason to even temporarily do it.

Really? So how would you code this on an EICR?

What would you consider the likelihood (eg. 1 in (?)) of receiving a shock from said switch?

As far as temporary or even permanent repairs go, sockets are often more important than sockets generally.

?

Installing things things is one thing, temporary repairs are another.

Does BS7671 take this view?

 

[Starspark1]

Installing things things is one thing, temporary repairs are another.

Does it state that in bs7671??

As far as im aware there is no distinction temporary repairs/installations should be treated the same as permanent installations and regulations followed accordingly.

 

[sparkwright]

RF is quite right of course.

When under such pressure if time is running out you may have to resort to such measures.

So late in the day one cannot help but think what was allowed years ago, so that seems to count as reassurance when making a temporary repair.

For peace of mind the repair should be carried out the very next day.

Telling the customer not to use certain things can be helpful, if you believe him.

Sometimes this is a very difficult job, and carrying out work to very letter of the regulations can be a complete ****.

You cant break the law because your under pressure.

You cant break the law because its 10 at night.

You cant break the law because your tired.

You cant break the law because you used to do it.

Read EAWR regulations.

Not saying you in particular but others cant quote regs all day long but then contravene them when they feel like it and/or are tired and under pressure.

I do of couse agree with you in the main.

Ideally a faulty circuit should be completely isolated.

Getting the right parts to fix a fault late at night is of course a problem, and sometimes the important appliances like the freezer can be kept going to regulations.

With regulations often changing a temporary repair is getting harder to do.

But in the real world personal judgement can seem to take over... it's not right... it's not something to be proud of...

But you got to get that freezer going.

 

[Starspark1]

But as i stated there are ways and means and one of those is not removing the faulty circuit off the RCD side to keep the power on.

 

[sparkwright]

As far as temporary or even permanent repairs go, sockets are often more important than sockets generally.

?

I meant sockets are generally more likely to be required in a crisis than a 'shower'. Typing error.

 

[sparkwright]

But as i stated there are ways and means and one of those is not removing the faulty circuit off the RCD side to keep the power on.

I entirely agree, but if you don't have the right materials to do this late at night you're in **** street.

 

[SimonH2]

Simon please read thread properly ...

Thank you, I did read the thread and I do know exactly what I mean.

This faulty RFC is on an RCD with <some number> of unspecified other circuits. Thus the fault will knock out all those other circuits, not just the sockets. Worst case (bad design) would be all circuits on one RCD meaning absolutely nothing in the house working.
Thus the tenant may well be moaning about "no lights, no power, no ..." and they aren't going to accept "can't fix it now, I'll be back in the morning".

 

[Starspark1]

Simon please read thread properly ...

Thank you, I did read the thread and I do know exactly what I mean.

This faulty RFC is on an RCD with <some number> of unspecified other circuits. Thus the fault will knock out all those other circuits, not just the sockets. Worst case (bad design) would be all circuits on one RCD meaning absolutely nothing in the house working.
Thus the tenant may well be moaning about "no lights, no power, no ..." and they aren't going to accept "can't fix it now, I'll be back in the morning".

Yes but as stated previously by op he said socket circuit was moved to non rcd side??

Unless your talking about a different installation/matter entirely in which case start a new thread.

This one is complicated enough.

 

[sparkwright]

I would say it's fairly likely to recieve a shock from a pull switch contained somewhere in zone 1, and wouldn't do it - and can't see much reason to even temporarily do it.

Really? So how would you code this on an EICR?

It would be a fail.

But you initially described this scenario as one of FITTING it, not inspecting it.