Upgrading Bonding

[ml1936]

Just upgarded main bonding from MET to CU and installed bonding to gas from MET. The Water obviously may need bonding but the problem is the stop cock is enclosed behind tiles in a cloakroom with only tap stuck out. there's no way of seeing or testing if the pipes are copper or plastic. Hoseholder thinks there are plastic, but under sink, different part of house there are copper. Any suggestions?

Is it ok to fill in a MWC for work done and state on it that access to water stop cock is inaccessible and requires further investigation? Would this be acceptable to the regs?

 

[RF Lighting]

No. you need to see for certain.

What if you don't bond it, and the pipework turns out to be metal, and someone gets hurt, or its absence gets spotted and the question of why it wasn't done is raised?

 

[ml1936]

So how do i check to see if its metal? I put lead on tap and on stop cock to see if there was a reading but nothing, so presume plastic, is that ok? Can't i simply state this on MWC? Or say customer only wanted Main and Gas doing as Water would be to much mess for now?

 

[luminaire]

Do you know if next door's house was built at the same time?
If so any chance to see their's?
Might give you a clue.

 

[ml1936]

Is there no other way of testing apart from what i tried? Dont wanna bother neighbours. Isn't putting requires further investigation on MWC sufficient? What if customer only requests upgrade main and gas bonding? I cant make them have water done if it means ripping there new tiles off can i?

 

[RF Lighting]

You can't put requires futher investigation on a MEW cert. This is for PIRs only.

Why are you installing the bonding? Have you done some work in the house?

Cant you make a small hole above the stop cock and take a look?

The test between the stop cock and tap is not a reliable way of checking wether the pipe is copper or plastic

 

[ml1936]

Upgraded it for a friend, i've done no other work at his house. He had no bonding to gas and a 6mm as main bond so i said i'd upgrade for him. He dosnt want me breaking his tiles to see if it plastic or metal

 

[GaryMo]

Just upgarded main bonding from MET to CU

Sorry to seem pedantic but that's not a bonding conductor, it's a main earthing conductor.

As RF says, you may have to create a little damage to ascertain that main equipotential bonding is present at the incoming water supply.
Even seeing it terminate isn't good enough (unless you can visually see the whole run), you then have to disconnect (with installation isolated) and measure continuity.

 

[ml1936]

But what if friend is unwilling to allow me to remove his tiles? Wher do i stand there? Do i write it as departure and explain in comments?

 

[GaryMo]

I cant make them have water done if it means ripping there new tiles off can i?

You can't make the customer have anything done but if it's not present (assuming it's required) then you can't carry out any electrical work at that property though what you've done has actually improved the safety of the installation so that wouldn't be a problem.

 

[ml1936]

So what would you do in my situation? I propose to list as departure that cant verify if water bonding needed due to inaccessibilty, then write in comments that no electrical work can be carried out until established whether water bonding is needed. Would that be to the regs?

 

[GaryMo]

So what would you do in my situation? I propose to list as departure that cant verify if water bonding needed due to inaccessibilty, then write in comments that no electrical work can be carried out until established whether water bonding is needed. Would that be to the regs?

I think you've done all you can.
You have to ask yourself if you're happy that you've done all you can, in this case I would be happy with what you suggest.