UK Power Networks and the removal of a meter

[westie101]

It's not a fire risk.
Having two supplies in a building is a risk to the firefighters if there is a fire.

I supect the cost of the alteration will be higher than suggested once it becomes clear that excavation will be required on the public footpath

 

[JohnW2]

But if one supply is capped off outside then surely it is irrelevant because there's only one supply inside that's feeding the house, so where is the fire risk?

I didn't say that it was a "fire risk" - I said it was a risk to fire fighters. (as I see westie has just repeated)

Kind Regards, John

 

[ey143]

Ok I didn't focus on the precise wording. How is it a risk to firefighters in a fire? Are you talking about if the five melts the casing and then exposes live cable to them?

If so, then surely it's no different to any other main live cable coming to the house for the primary supply except for the fact that there's a second one ?

 

[JohnW2]

Ok I didn't focus on the precise wording. How is it a risk to firefighters in a fire? Are you talking about if the five melts the casing and then exposes live cable to them?

Sort-of. If they assume, as is the case with virtually all domestic premises, that there is just a single electricity supply, once they have identified where that is (and perhaps removed the fuse), they know (or think they know) where the potential electrical hazard is. If, unbeknown to them, there were a second supply, they could stumble across that somewhere in the inferno and be exposed to an unsuspected electrical risk. If, in a more general case than the one you are postulating, the second supply actually fed some parts of the installation, there could be potentially live cable anywhere in the property, even after they thought they had removed the electrical risk due to the one supply that they were aware of.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ey143]

Understood and makes valid sense.

Thanks for all the comments.