Part P, making a difference....NOT...

[Ian_m]

A neighbour of my mates just had a two sockets fitted outside, one near lawn and other near water feature to replace the unsafe extension lead previously there. Fitted non DIY (from what I understand) using SWA cable to separate mini CU in garage, I peered over fence all looked terminated OK from what I could see and cable buried underground in either gravel gap round house and under flower bed.

But my mate in chatting to neighbour about this, and possibly wanting the same, neighbour completely unaware of any BCO / Part P requirements, though installer did mention something or other, but he's not too sure. Neighbour not bothered, going to stay in house till he dies, happy it all works.

So has part P made any difference in the field................

Actually my mate had a good one in the house he moved into, 2.5mm white T&E existing through hacked hole in side of double socket in his conservatory, up wall, through "hacked" hole in polycarbonate roof, back down outside wall to water proof socket. All holes smeared with masses of silicone sealant !!! This has since been changed !!!

[Uno Hoo!]

My house has a waterproof socket on the rear wall of the house fed direct from the back of an internal ring-main socket. Is this not 'legal' ?

Kev

[Andrew Gabriel]

The socket must be RCD protected at no more than 30mA, either by itself, or because the whole ring circuit is.

However, it's not a good idea to have circuits outdoors and indoors sharing the same RCD as someone outside, or a leaky socket, can easily trip the indoors supply, although this isn't contrary to the regs.

[bigcat]

No... people that do work that is outside of the regs are pretty much never concerned about the now existence of prat p. Since the ones that do this dont care about the 16th edn regs, why would they care about pP? Its an obvious dud from start to finish.

NT

[John Rumm]

Might be worth pointing out the reverse is not true however ;-)

Just because you don't give a monkeys abut Part P does not mean you will disregard the regs!

[Ian_m]

Snip

Actually this is what my mate converted his outside socket to from the 2.5mm running up and over.

[ElectriciansForum]

[Andrew Gabriel]

if you search this newsgroup, and a number of us here took part in the consultation prior to the legislation coming in to force.

[Lurch]

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 10:30:45 +0100, "ElectriciansForum" strung together this:

Also added your URL to the banned sites list.

Thanks for listening.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

If the ring is RCD protected, then it's ok.

I did exactly this, but mounted a single RCD alongside the socket I'd picked up from. Since the external socket is in the front of the house - for car hoovering, etc, I wanted to be able to switch it off when not in use to prevent passing film crews etc stealing my power. ;-)

[Huge]

Me too.

An "RCD Spur" to be exact.

Mine's in the porch. Once the deck's finished, I'm going to put another one round the back.

I was more concerned about burglars thinking "Kewl, somewhere to plug the electric chainsaw in so I can cut open the front door."

[Andrew Gabriel]

I did it using a dedicated radial circuit for the outdoor sockets. That circuit is TT earthed, and is protected with a 10mA RCBO in the CU. It starts in the garage where there is a cooker point with integral socket for plugging in things being used just outside the garage (pressure washer is the most common), and the cooker switch is the isolator for front and back garden outdoor sockets which are used for the lawn mower. This seemed like the ideal use for a cooker switch with integral socket, as they are not actually suitable for cookers in my view.

[Stefek Zaba]

Na. The *interesting* debate - actually, it's a little one-sided - is over at

< > 40 IEE members calling Part P a waste of space (and an affront to their semi-cherished CEng status ;-), one Forensick Inspector sitting on the fence.

Stefek

[Bob Eager]

I might go over there and make it 41......!

[bigcat]

semi-spam addy snipped

surprisingly, there is, despite it being spam, with IIRC 3 threads on PP. Admittedly with only 3 or 4 people, but a good point or two made nonetheless. Other than that its a fairly dead forum.

I only mention it cos there is some good part p material there I've not seen here... but not a lot, and thats pretty much all thats there.

Owains & Grunff's posts are the best though :) Lets hope they learn.

NT

[John]

When you consider the tremendous effort and discussion which the Institutions have spent over the last ten years or more regarding the improvement/recognition of the status of Engineers then see how part P has effectively dismissed all this effort the reaction is only to be expected. Still what else can you expect from our PMs fat buffoon of a deputy?

[Andy Hall]

I think I might re-join just to join the fun.

[Lurch]

On 4 Jun 2005 14:19:40 GMT, [e-mail] (Huge) strung together this:

Mine are isolated so passing pikeys don't set up camp on the drive while I'm not looking. The one on the front is a BS4343 socket so most people don't even know what it is.

[Ed Sirett]

...and were ignored.

[Ian_m]

Oh, and my mate bought his house without the FENSA (?) window certificate as the previous occupiers undergoing a divorce couldn't find it and installers who had changed names many times since installation couldn't be bothered/had lost it as well. Didn't want to loose buying the house so had to buy house as "seen".

I can see the same happening with Part P during sales.