socket and light switch heights

Page 2 of 3  
David wrote:

Well, one thing that springs to mind is that it stops children, possibly with wet hands, playing with them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"parish" wrote | David wrote: | > It's just that we're conditioned to light switches being at | > shoulder height, for no good reason that I can see (cue for somebody | > to post a good reason!). So why not? | Well, one thing that springs to mind is that it stops children, possibly | with wet hands, playing with them.
And if you've got both hands full a shoulder height switch is easier to press with your nose.
Owain
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Owain wrote:

And if you have an erection, you can always press a lower switch.
This could go on forever..

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote | Owain wrote: | > And if you've got both hands full a shoulder height switch | > is easier to press with your nose. | And if you have an erection, you can always press a lower switch.
But some people would need a lower switch than others ... Now the height of my light switches would not be a source of embarrassment to me, but it might be to some.
Can you imagine looking round houses to buy, and the missus turning round to you in front of the sellers and saying "Now then Mr P., you'll have to get your black and decker out and move all these light switches." -- "'Appen you're right, Mrs P., I don't think it's worth the bother, we'll just go back to the estate agents and tell them we want a house with light switches positioned for the smaller man."
| This could go on forever..
Then it'd turn blue and drop off.
Owain
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23 Aug 2003 08:09:52 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com (David) wrote:

You enter a dark room and are forced to find the light switch by hand. Your starter for 10 is that the switch will be just inside the doorway on the wall opposite the door hinges.
Dang, where's that light switch......
Andrew
http://www.handymac.co.uk
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 09:39:53 +0100, Hugo Nebula <Send-My-Spam-To:

Except that it's going to take an extremely long time before a large proportion of houses have wiring accessories fitted in this way.
I have a pretty fair appreciation for the needs of people with limited mobility - my father is disabled - however this requirement does very little to help, even when it has been more widely implemented than it has today.
It would be far better to invest in providing better forms of wheelchairs and other forms of assistance for the people involved. The problem is that this costs money which is typically derived from local or central government coffers.
It is far easier to push requirements like altered wiring accessory heights on the community at large and then to be able to claim that things are being done for those with special needs.
It's political correctness in its worst form.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
(David)

This is balls! There is no extra cost in locating light fittings and sockets at heights that are suitable for all, even disabled. Wider ground floor doors are brilliant for all and little, if any at all, extra cost. When the industry is geared up to it, not extra whatsoever.
All major kitchen applinaces should be on a switch central box, at wheelchair height, instead of those stupid fused spur switches all around the worktops. MEM do a v good one.
I don't want any more taxes thank you. We pay enough keeping the parasites (monarchy, large land owners, Oxbridge, etc, etc) in clover. The snotty uni fella and now this one want to tax the hell out of us all. Have one tax Land Value Tax (LVT) and be done with it.
--
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 04/08/2003
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're dead right there.

Once again you have missed the point.
I didn't say that there was a cost argument either way in having wiring accessories at different heights, or, since you mention it making doors wider.
My objection to this is that once again it is window dressing and humbug - the government trying to pretend that by legislating something like this, that it is really doing something important for people with special needs.
Almost everybody that I know who has limited mobility (and I know quite a few) is totally unimpressed with this kind of nonsense.
Yes, they do appreciate good access in public buildings but do not expect or want the rest of the community to alter what it has to accommodate them. They would much rather benefit from some of the new mobility technology that makes it possible to participate as closely as possible as anybody else and without feeling that things in general have had to be changed to suit them.
This approach costs money, of course, and is not particularly sexy and high profile. It's far easier for governments to legislate something than to provide funds to do the job properly.

Then you're supporting the wrong players.

The parasites are the multiple levels of non-productive management in the public services and specifically in socialised medicine.

.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:> >> It would be far better to invest in providing better forms of

ground
uni
So says the voice of Little Middle England.
--
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 04/08/2003
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
David wrote:

Funnily enough we were discussing this last night with me mates old dad, and he DOES find high sockets useful - he can hobble around on severely arthritic knees etc, but bending is a tad hard.
As far as switches go, again its no big deal to put em lower down where kids can reach them..
But the high electrical sockets do have a downside - cables no longer lie along the floor. This may constitute a hazard in its own right.
Philosophically, I am concerned at the amount of money being spent on generalised rules - things like this, speed humps, speed cameras - when rough bacl of teh envelope calculations suggest that if the hidden costs of all this normalisation of society to a 'one size fits all' were taken into account, it would become pretty obvious that its cheaper to give every elderly or disabled person a re-wire grant. And pay a few policemen to catch flagrant dangerous drivers, rather than providing jobs for magistrates courts, a steady income for the manufacturers od GATSOS and replacement tryes, shock abosrbers and car exhausts.
The phrase 'being strangled by legislation' has been arournd a long time as the cry of the sof tory business voter and frankly I had always heard it as 'wolf'...but now, as an ordinary citizen, it is beginning to make a terrifying sort of sense.
When compliance with regulations and achievement of arbitrary targets becomes the raison d'etre of huge swathes of management in schools, hospitals and every area of public life, rather than the achievement of good medical care, education, or whatever the departments function is, we are already in trouble.
When the way the average citizen is treated is more or less tantamount to implying that they cannot, without enforcement of strict legislation, be trusted to use their judgement in anything - EXCEPT OF COURSE VOTING IN TEFLON TONE - one stumbles on a deeply cynical double standard that seems to be at the heart of everything the current government does.
If you trust your electorate so little, what does that imply about the government they have elected?
</rant>

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I deliberately put my garage sockets high on the basis that when working in the garage I don't want to bend down to plug and unplug power tools. I'd rather have the socket at eye height so that once I've finished drilling or cutting I can get straight to the socket to take the power off the device.
Not that I've seen that many garages equipped with sockets at the normal level of a house of course ;)
Andrew
http://www.handymac.co.uk
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

the
Nonsense. I have Part M sockets. No problems at all. Brilliant for all people.

Well introduce LVT and get rid of the 1947 T&C planning act. Very simple.
--
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 04/08/2003
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Means you can't put anything taller than a metre against that bit of wall.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes Part M, for disabled access. Ground floor doors also have to be wider and front access without steps.
--
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 04/08/2003
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A form of local income tax would have been better.
My mother was the definitive person who should have benefitted from the poll tax versus rates. An elderly widow of small income living on her own in the house she'd owned for a lifetime. But the practice was she paid *more* when it was introduced than she did in rates, which had a sophisticated rebate system.
This actually changed her from a lifetime Tory - she saw the poll tax for what it was, a way of reducing taxation on wealthy property owners and shifting it to the less well off and indeed downright poor.
--
*Do they ever shut up on your planet?

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@argonet.co.uk London SW 12
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not this time.
But what happens if you rewire a house that was built after the disabled regs were introduced? You can rewire a 1980's house with sockets and lightswitches at any height you like as there are no building regs applicable to their height when they were built. If you buy a house that was built today and rewire it can you put the switches and sockets where you like?
Adam
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Christian McArdle wrote:

You are. I thought so to, and had to move the ***ing lot after the Inspector called.
Wheelchair access applies to one entrance on one storey and to get to one bog.
Electrical regs apply throughout. Presumably even in the loft. :-)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This isn't in any 'Electrical regs' though.
--
Andrew Gabriel

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

Well building comntrol regs then.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

[snip]
There have been "definitive" answers both ways now - so which is it?
I have a house built in 1950. I am re-wiring it. Can I put the switches and sockets where I like, or do they have to be at the heights suggested in the latest wiring and building regs?
My preference is to stick with the existing heights, which are probably a bit too low for sockets and a bit too high for switches, according to the regulations.
And another question: let's say (for argument's sake) that I've already started re-wiring, and the new sockets (intentionally) don't match the height regulations. What happens?
cheers, David.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.