Safe Or Legal? (Yes, There Is A Shed Involved)

[NozSpark]

It's all in Approved document P... Remember I look at the Welsh version which is slightly different to the English one and drastically different to the non existant Scottish one

 

[Andy™]

Excuse my ignorance but such as?

probably to stop people putting a new socket in the shed, running a bit of 1.5 T&E in some blue MDPE pipe buried about 1 grain of sand soil deep then dragged across kitchen floor to a socket behind the fridge, then saying its not notifiable because its plugged in

2.8: Installing fixed electrical equipment is within the scope of Part P, even if the final connection is by a standard 13A plug and socket, but is notifiable only if it involves work set out in regulation 12(6A)

 

[Essex1]

I just skimmed through it and cannot see any example of where a plug in 'installation' would fall under Part P. Have you got an example in Wales?

 

[Andy™]

well you need to look harder... its on page 7 near the bottom...

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/br/BR_PDF_AD_P_2013.pdf

 

[Essex1]

probably to stop people putting a new socket in the shed, running a bit of 1.5 T&E in some blue MDPE pipe buried about 1 grain of sand soil deep then dragged across kitchen floor to a socket behind the fridge, then saying its not notifiable because its plugged in

But a plug would not be a new circuit and would not be installed within bathroom zones so I am still struggling to see an example. Or am I being thick?

well you need to look harder... its on page 7 near the bottom...

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/br/BR_PDF_AD_P_2013.pdf

I get it is n there but I am trying to see an example. Which I am struggling with.

 

[Andy™]

if the work would normally be notifiable then it doesnt matter if its connected via a plug or not...

is it really that hard to understand?

 

[Essex1]

if the work would normally be notifiable then it doesnt matter if its connected via a plug or not...

is it really that hard to understand?

Hmmm. I suppose external lights fed via a plug top then?

 

[Blue Duck]

hum... if the customer buys the bits I increase my hourly rate to compensate for the lost profit on the parts. I don't graft for 50 hours a week, not to earn a living.

I understand this! I can barely afford to live as it is!

You could make it work for you though as it's potentially an easy job. you never know til you go look. :C

 

[binky]

if the lights are fixed to a wall / shed / fence, then it is notifiable. If for example, you string up some lights for xmas / party, then they aen't permanent and not notifiable is the way I would read that.

I hadn't realised that loophole had been sorted out in Notifiable work, previoulsy you could have installed 20 double sockets next to CU and run extension leads all around the house, not that anyone would.....

 

[Essex1]

if the lights are fixed to a wall / shed / fence, then it is notifiable. If for example, you string up some lights for xmas / party, then they aen't permanent and not notifiable is the way I would read that.

I hadn't realised that loophole had been sorted out in Notifiable work, previoulsy you could have installed 20 double sockets next to CU and run extension leads all around the house, not that anyone would.....

I don't think that would ever have been permissible due to the 'sound workmanship' clause. No one in their right mind would say that was an installation to a good standard of workmanship.

 

[Andy™]

if the lights are fixed to a wall / shed / fence, then it is notifiable. If for example, you string up some lights for xmas / party, then they aen't permanent and not notifiable is the way I would read that.

I hadn't realised that loophole had been sorted out in Notifiable work, previoulsy you could have installed 20 double sockets next to CU and run extension leads all around the house, not that anyone would.....

erm... its been in there since part p was started.... page 9, 'h'

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/br/BR_PDF_ADP_2006.pdf

 

[binky]

hmmmm .missed that one then :innocent

 

[Doc Hudson]

Thanks for these views. I fully agree that any new work should be correctly specified, installed, and certified as required.

The point that was disturbing me was that extending an existing cable with an extension lead that is open to weather/abuse is ok, but once the connections are solidly made using the correct junction boxes and the armoured cable buried underground then the whole scheme is (officially) a potential hazard.

I get the temporary vs permanent distinction, though I wonder how it is defined...

No using a temporary supply as a permanent fixture is not OK. All wiring should be correctly designed installed and tested to verify it is suitable for its environment and will disconnect the power sufficiently quickly in the event of a fault so as not to endanger people property or livestock.  The difference is around who is doing the work. If you as a DIYer choose to do some poor quality work that could endanger your friends family or loved ones that is your choice. But if you employ someone they should be ensuring all legal obligations are met and that the work is proved to be safe at the time when they energies it and hand it over to the customer.  It is a bit more down to who has what duty of care, responsibility and obligations to ensure work meets the industry recognised guidance, BS7671 wiring regulations (non statutory) and the statutory obligations of Part P where applicable. All work temporary or permanent should still be designed installed tested and verified to comply with BS7671. and temporary work should be even more rigorously checked due to the greater number of external influences that can damage the circuit wiring.

Doc H

 

[Essex1]

No using a temporary supply as a permanent fixture is not OK. All wiring should be correctly designed installed and tested to verify it is suitable for its environment and will disconnect the power sufficiently quickly in the event of a fault so as not to endanger people property or livestock. The difference is around who is doing the work. If you as a DIYer choose to do some poor quality work that could endanger your friends family or loved ones that is your choice. But if you employ someone they should be ensuring all legal obligations are met and that the work is proved to be safe at the time when they energies it and hand it over to the customer. It is a bit more down to who has what duty of care, responsibility and obligations to ensure work meets the industry recognised guidance, BS7671 wiring regulations (non statutory) and the statutory obligations of Part P where applicable. All work temporary or permanent should still be designed installed tested and verified to comply with BS7671. and temporary work should be even more rigorously checked due to the greater number of external influences that can damage the circuit wiring.

Doc H

Spot on. However. Seeing that Part P which as you say is statutory states that 'Electrical installations should be designed and installed in accordance with BS 7671:2008' which you say is non-statutory. Does this not in effect make BS7671 statutory through Part P?

 

[Sharpend]

No, if it was meant to be statutory then it would've been produced that way? It is merely seen as a best practice guidance for installations for if you can deviate from it if you can demonstrate that you are not making the installation any less safe than by using BS7671.

It can't become statutory by association?

 

[Essex1]

No, if it was meant to be statutory then it would've been produced that way? It is merely seen as a best practice guidance for installations for if you can deviate from it if you can demonstrate that you are not making the installation any less safe than by using BS7671.

It can't become statutory by association?

Ok I am playing devil's now but:1. Is Part P statutory?

2. Does part P say "Electrical installations should be designed and installed in accordance with BS 7671:2008"?

3. If both answers are yes then are you in breach of Part P if you do not install to BS7671?

4. If yes to Q3 is not complying with Part P breaking the law?

 

[NozSpark]

General Notification of work0.2

A way of satisfying the fundamental

principles would be to follow:

a. the technical rules described in the body

of BS 7671:2001 as amended or in an

equivalent standard approved by a member

of the EEA; and

b. guidance given in installation manuals that

are consistent with BS 7671:2001, such as:

i.

the IEE (Institution of Electrical Engineers)

On-Site Guide;

ii. the series of IEE Publications, Guidance

Notes Nos 1 to 7

Note that it says "A way of satisfying the fundamental principles would be to follow:".... not "The way..."

So BS7671:2008 isn't brought into being as a statutory document

 

[Essex1]

This is a copy and paste direct from the Part P approved document:

General

1.1 Electrical installations should be designed and installed in accordance with BS 7671:2008 incorporating Amendment No 1:2011.

 

[NozSpark]

You'll have to forgive me, but my quote was directly from the Welsh version...(no translation needed)....... I've not read the English version

It seems that both of our Part P documents, while being the latest versions, are out of date

 

[steptoe]

BS7671 states that deviations from the regulations ARE permissable,

so that also allows non compliance with BS7671 and still be compliant with partP  :C

partP states compliance with BS7671, BS7671 allows deviations, so to comply with BS7671 you are still allowed to deviate from it, so still complying with partP s requirement to comply with BS7671 as long as you follow BS7671 s allowance to deviate from BS7671,

anyone still following?

sounds about right for the way our regs are written.    :| :| :|   :C