Adding a piece on during a rewire

[pewter]

Not sure I agree with a rewire being treated as a new build. A Victorian house would look a bit out with 2015 part m heights.

I have rewired loads of victorian places with boxes at 500mm centers.

 

[Andy™]

your contractor sounds like a muppet, a complete re-wire is treated the same as a new build and has been for many years. It may be worth checking out who he is registered with and making a formal complaint

no its not. if it was a rewire as part of a refurb then yes, but just a re-wire then no. just dont make it any worse than it already was. cant argue with the muppet part though

 

[binky]

you sure about that Andy? I could, and often are, be wrong, but i thought  a complete re-wire needed to fully comply, unless there are some special reasons not to, like the building is listed. Of course, if you retun to fiish the job  amonth later so it's in 2 parts, then it doesn't have to comply cos it ain't a full re-wire.....

 

[steptoe]

I'd agree with Andy,

 

[kerching]

I agree with @steptoe who agrees with @Andy

so that's 3 of us who are correct.  :innocent

 

[binky]

Just had a dig around t'internet and it would seem Part M applies to new builds only, and that re-wires / older properties should be 'no less compliant' than when you start, unless substantial works are being undertaken (define that ). However various LABC inspectors may have other ideas if involved. So don't get them involved  :innocent

 

[Murdoch]

From ....

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/540330/BR_PDF_AD_M1_2015_with_2016_amendments_V3.pdf

"Building work

Regulation 3 of the Building Regulations defines ‘building work’. Building work includes:

a. the erection or extension of a building

b. the provision or extension of a controlled service or fitting

c. the material alteration of a building or a controlled service or fitting.

Regulation 4 states that building work should be carried out in such a way that, when work is complete:

a. For new buildings or work on a building that complied with the applicable requirements of the Building Regulations

: the building complies with the applicable requirements of the Building Regulations.

b. For work on an existing building that did not comply with the applicable requirements of the

Building Regulations

:

(i) the work itself must comply with the applicable requirements of the Building Regulations

(ii) the building must be no more unsatisfactory in relation to the requirements than before the

work was carried out."

So the definition is open to interpretation - so the blame for the differing views on this is with the authors of the document.

Like BS 7671, it needs to be reviewed by the Plain English Society ...........

 

[Charltonchambers]

Gosh I've read that 3 times and I'm still not clear what it means. Having said that the wiring was dangerously faulty and kept blowing fuses (old style fuse box), hence the rewire. Having started the rewire the contractor has found any number of faults in the current installation and numerous previous fires that we were blissfully unaware of. We're upgrading the fuse box to one with mcb's and the shower is now on a separate box. We will shortly have nice new and much safer wiring so whilst we'd have preferred the sockets at the new regulation height that's just our personal preference. It's to be hoped they'd recognise the safety improvement and not get caught up with the height of the sockets. Though I'm not sure Local Authority's often see the bigger picture where there are boxes to be ticked !!

 

[binky]

(ii) the building must be no more unsatisfactory in relation to the requirements than before the

work was carried out."

that is the nub of the matter...

 

[Murdoch]

(ii) the building must be no more unsatisfactory in relation to the requirements than before the

work was carried out."

that is the nub of the matter...

I quite agree but surely there must be an easier way to word that!

 

[binky]

that would spoil hours of discussion on forums

 

[Murdoch]

that would spoil hours of discussion on forums

But ....... It would put a good few jumped up building inspectors in their place!

 

[Tony S]

We could go down the American route and appoint AHJ (authority having jurisdiction) inspectors paid for by the government.

2nd thoughts, the government would privatise it and a new breed of scam would evolve to line their pockets.

 

[Risteard]

BS7671, Wiring regulations, only state that sockets should be sufficiently high so as to not mechanically damage the plug or socket in normal use. i.e. not too low above floors or worktops. (Reg 553.1.6).

Indeed, and this surely precludes the mounting of them on skirting boards!

 

[Tony S]

Indeed, and this surely precludes the mounting of them on skirting boards!

I think you’ll find it doesn’t.

 

[SLIPSHOD & SLAPDASH]

Indeed, and this surely precludes the mounting of them on skirting boards!

Not necessarily. We recently carried out a rewire in a Victorian house with 300mm high skirtings (quite normal around these parts). After discussions with the owners we cut all the socket boxes in the skirtings. All a min of 200mm off the floor which is higher than most 60s-80s installations and well above  Hoover or boot damage. This stopped any damage to the lath & plaster walls and filled many botched holes that looked like a beaver had gnawed a hole to flush in a socket without any box.

 

[binky]

don't see proper skirting boards like that very often. I have also put sockets in boards that big, usually to match all the other sockets that have been put in before hand, which then saves trying to fill holes in the boards

 

[kerching]

Oh the hours I have spent with a padsaw, brace & 1/2" bit, wood chisel and 1" lath nails boxing up!....and then you hit a wooden plug or 1/2" lead water main ....the joys

 

[Risteard]

We recently carried out a rewire in a Victorian house with 300mm high skirtings (quite normal around these parts). After discussions with the owners we cut all the socket boxes in the skirtings. All a min of 200mm off the floor

I have to say I assumed that we were talking of nothing like that height. If there was around 150mm clearance (or perhaps 100mm at a push) then it's likely not to damage the plug/flex. But your typical skirting board would definitely fall foul of that.

So apologies if others were referring to some enormous Victorian-style skirting board!

 

[Charltonchambers]

Just thought I'd update you all as you've been so helpful. following the comments we received we decided to get a second, and third opinion. We'd pretty much had enough of contractor 1 who continually wanted more money to continue the work (even tho we paid the full bill up front) which as we didn't want to be left with half a job we had paid, and paid, and stupidly paid. Crunch time came and we said enough is enough, please leave. We've therefore lost a lot of money but put an end to the chaos he's caused in our home. Contractors 2 and 3 (unconnected) both agreed the work of contractor 1 is sub standard, and in places just plain wrong, and we've now employed contractor 2 to put it right. Contractor 1 was a con artist and we've unfortunately been scammed by a guy who had all the gear but no idea. For example he said we needed armoured cable replacing which feeds the garage as its not up to spec. Charged us £400 plus his markup for a roll of armoured cable. Both C2 and C3 agree the new is identical to what's already in place and is actually about £120 a roll, and there's nothing wrong with what's in place. I could give many more examples but it doesn't change anything. It been a hard and expensive lesson but we're now on the road to recovery.