Replacement consumer unit

[mapleford]

Hi All,

Got called out to quote on a kitchen redo the other day, checked CU and it was a split load RCD/MCBs, told client I'd need to check price of RCBO's for his lighting as currently just MCB protected and he wanted downlights (got slightly bitten on MEM board). "I had that put in last month" he said. REALLY could I see the certs, Sorry no certs, friends brother did it. OH dear..... To cut story short sent Email to spark enlightening him on 17th and RCDs quoting regs. He is now saying that it was a "repair" and thus does not need RCDs covering all the circuits. B......s. As I understand it if he changed from rewirables to a new board this is an alteration to the installation and therefore requires compliance with the regs. Can anyone point to where I can prove my point to get him to put it right?

 

[Foxmeister]

Reg 701.411.3.3 of the BRB

Locations containing a bath or shower.

 

[kme]

Also use: 610.4, 633

314.1, referred to from OSG 3.6.2 & figs. 3.1-3.5

HTH

KME

 

[mapleford]

Quoted him originally 522.6.6 - 522.6.8 but now he says its a repair not replacement so does not need the upgrade. Old one not damaged but..Just need some quotes of regs to prove upgrade not repair so no excuses from him and he can put it right.

 

[a1spark]

I wouldnt bother mate !

Youve told the customer whats required ..Re : RCD protection ,so qoute him for the job as you plan to install it...i.e RCBO.

He got the original job done its up to him [ the customer] to chase the other Spark for a refund [ partail]...not your job to be his solicitor is it

 

[Theorysparky]

Hi All,Got called out to quote on a kitchen redo the other day, checked CU and it was a split load RCD/MCBs, told client I'd need to check price of RCBO's for his lighting as currently just MCB protected and he wanted downlights (got slightly bitten on MEM board). "I had that put in last month" he said. REALLY could I see the certs, Sorry no certs, friends brother did it. OH dear..... To cut story short sent Email to spark enlightening him on 17th and RCDs quoting regs. He is now saying that it was a "repair" and thus does not need RCDs covering all the circuits. B......s. As I understand it if he changed from rewirables to a new board this is an alteration to the installation and therefore requires compliance with the regs. Can anyone point to where I can prove my point to get him to put it right?

There is something in the regs that allows a sparky to replace a consumer unit without full tests and rcds

'distressed replacement' or something

for instance the incoming main switch burnt out and you replaced the board just to get service back,,,but you would be expected to do the job properly in a resonable time

maybe he is coming back

anyway price for rcbos

 

[mapleford]

Many thanks,

I think that 610.4 may be the reg I was after. I'd love to find out which Part P provider he has and give them a call...

 

[Theorysparky]

Many thanks,I think that 610.4 may be the reg I was after. I'd love to find out which Part P provider he has and give them a call...

you think hes got one !!!!!!!! ROTFWL

 

[jl-heating]

typical of jobs i go to regularly .... i just quote for he work to comply it really is a waste of time trying to educate the general public...

 

[a1spark]

Hi. Theorysparky ,I think what you where thinking of was not a Regulation but a guidance from the ESC. in their literature of Relacing a consumer unit in an emergency situation "Distress change"...dont think you would be able to not rcd the circuits though. from memory it covers other non compliances like no earth to lights etc, You are still advised to tell the client that upgrading is necessary though---In Writing.

 

[kme]

it really is a waste of time trying to educate the general public...

I know where you`re coming from, but if the likes of us don`t educate `em, nothing will EVER change. We MUST be making a differenceray

 

[Theorysparky]

Hi. Theorysparky ,I think what you where thinking of was not a Regulation but a guidance from the ESC. in their literature of Relacing a consumer unit in an emergency situation "Distress change"...dont think you would be able to not rcd the circuits though. from memory it covers other non compliances like no earth to lights etc, You are still advised to tell the client that upgrading is necessary though---In Writing.

thanks mate thats what i was thinking

i asked my assessor this question and he said it was allowable to put another cu in even if it wasnt to regs but only until the next convenient oportunity arose to complete a proper replacement/upgrade

 

[Andy™]

thanks mate thats what i was thinkingi asked my assessor this question and he said it was allowable to put another cu in even if it wasnt to regs but only until the next convenient oportunity arose to complete a proper replacement/upgrade

nothing is more permanent than temporary

 

[Graham Lister]

Hi All,Got called out to quote on a kitchen redo the other day, checked CU and it was a split load RCD/MCBs, told client I'd need to check price of RCBO's for his lighting as currently just MCB protected and he wanted downlights (got slightly bitten on MEM board). "I had that put in last month" he said. REALLY could I see the certs, Sorry no certs, friends brother did it. OH dear..... To cut story short sent Email to spark enlightening him on 17th and RCDs quoting regs. He is now saying that it was a "repair" and thus does not need RCDs covering all the circuits. B......s. As I understand it if he changed from rewirables to a new board this is an alteration to the installation and therefore requires compliance with the regs. Can anyone point to where I can prove my point to get him to put it right?

Do you know this customer? Are you there quoting for a builder or something? If neither then I think you are just fighting a losing battle. With this the customer will side with the friends brother. Just give a price to do it properly and walk dont waste anymore time on it. Or just put lights on rcd side of board.

 

[mapleford]

The customer is after getting the CU sorted properly and is chasing the "spark" to get it done however the "spark" is just trying to swerve it. I've now suggested he takes the Part P cert he's just been offered the take it up with the issuing body. I can see that this will probably be his safest bet.