Are earth's required?

Discussion in 'Electricians' Talk' started by Tony689, Feb 21, 2021 at 11:13 PM.

  1. The Happy Builder

    The Happy Builder Screwfix Select

    I read these forums to see what others are having issues and problems with and how to avoid or get out of having the same problem.

    Having read this post I remember why I choose to fit plain and simple pneumatic time lag switches in preference to more complicated switches. The one landlord said he thought I would have fitted internal PIRs to control the lights rather than time lag switches, I told him he could have those as well, but he never came back and said fit them.
  2. MGW

    MGW Screwfix Select

    And the current regulations say these apply to anything designed after given date, so it does comply with current regulations if it complied with the regulations in force at the time it was designed as the current regulations say that is OK.

    It is like those forms which say if answer to question B is no then move to section F but people still complete C, D and E even when answer was no.

    To read the regulations it is important to understand English, where I live in Wales this is a real problem, as unless published also in Welsh then it does not count. Good reason the double negative, and, or, may be well described in boolean logic even NAND and NOR, but in every day English or Welsh not quite so easy. Corrected now I know, but at first cables buried in walls regulations did not say it did not apply to SELV.

    But if you read the best practice guides it does show again and again how you don't need all RCD protection or metal consumer units for all installations. And the IET removed code 4 (does not comply to current edition of wiring regulations) as they realised they had made an error, it should have said (would not comply with current edition of wiring regulations for a new design) and yes I think that would be helpful so owners know what needs doing if they want to add to the design.

    But this is nothing to do with electrical safety, it is more to do with use of English, I am lucky my wife studied English to degree level so I have some one I can ask, working out with the "nay, no, never, nay, no, never, no, more" if it means yes or no is not my scene.
  3. The Happy Builder

    The Happy Builder Screwfix Select

    Using a bare wire circuit protective protective conductor as a live conductor was never acceptable and never will be.

    This has nothing to do with the date of installation or EICRs, it’s just rough.
  4. Well-Known Member

    You need a cpc at each point.

    You could do away with the switches and install a photocell for the lights, then no switches
  5. Nomenklatura

    Nomenklatura Active Member

    No, that's not what it says.


    Attached Files:

  6. MGW

    MGW Screwfix Select

    Your splitting hairs, OK "does not necessarily" is not the same as "does not" and there will be new devices that may not be safe to use on old installations, like boilers and showers which manufacturers now say need RCD protection and in some cases even say type A RCD protection type AC is not good enough. But there is no requirement to change an old Wilex fuse box to a new consumer unit unless some thing has changed, i.e. new boiler fitted for example.

    I think landlords should install RCD protection for all circuits, I have for my own house, but they are not forced to do so. Just because today we can't fit RCD sockets or FCU that comply with regulations, does not mean they should no longer be used.
    stevie22 likes this.
  7. Nomenklatura

    Nomenklatura Active Member

    Not really - just quoting what the regs actually say.

    I never suggested it is, but that's a very odd comment to make given that I posted the quote because of this:

    The regulations don't say that an installation complies with the current regulations if it complied with the regulations in force at the time it was designed. They really don't. They don't say it necessarily does not comply, but they definitely do not say that if it complied with the regulations in force at the time it was designed it complies with the current regulations.

    Couldn't agree more.

    They are if they employ a NAPIT guy to do the report, apparently. ;)

    Indeed not, but they cannot be installed today as a way to comply with the requirements for RCD protection.

    The $64,000 question though is if they are already installed when the guy comes to do his inspection, he can justify a C3 for the non-compliance, but can he really justify saying that having BS 7288 RCD protection instead of BS EN 61008/61009/62423 is actually potentially dangerous and requires urgent rectification?

    (IMO no).

Share This Page