Legal requirement or not?

Watch out for your Buildings Insurance company insisting on the upgrade, or issuing a fire excess or even exclusion on the policy.

Has anyone experienced that? I've never seen an insurance company ask about electrics when getting a quote, let alone demanding upgrades to what was a perfectly good installation at the time of install.

(may be different if it's business premises, I don't know)

Theo

I'd be interested in evidence of an insurance company doing that for cover for an owner/occupier (as opposed to cover for a landlord's property or for a business occupier).

Which is true. Bill

And there is nothing wrong with just enclosing it in a fireproof made out of something like Fermacell. Problem solved.

Oddly, my new smart meter appears to be made of plastic. Perhaps that uses smart electricity that can't cause a fire?

And in the past, these were typically caused by poor contact twixt busbar and mcb because the clamp screw was not tightened enough.

Now every electrician has (or should have) a torque screwdriver.

And it is not clear whether a stand-alone isolator can still be plastic

- they are certainly sold as plastic and they are not consumer units.

I thought we had, but might have been mistaken. Longish story.

We bought a bungalow which had been underpinned 16 years earlier. The vendor had checked with her insurance company who had said they would continue the insurance with us, but they changed their minds! So when we moved in we had no buildings insurance. Few companies will insure underpinned properties, but one said they would. They wanted to see our surveyor's report first, though. They had no problems with the underpinning, but the report had a throwaway comment: "Given the age of the bungalow, you are recommended to have the electrical circuits tested by an NICEIC registered electrician before exchange of contracts." This was classified under "No repair is currently needed. The property must be maintained in the normal way."

When the insurance company saw this, we got a quote with an endorsement: "Electrical inspection - It is a condition of this Policy that an electrical inspection is carried out by a NICEIC registered electrician and forwarded to us...Failure to comply will result in the exclusion of Cause 1-Fire, if established to be as a result of faulty electrical wiring or associated components".

I couldn't get an electrician to do the inspection until 6 weeks later. He said the wiring was ok, but the 20-years old CU had MCBs or RCDs with outdated specs. I told him to update it, but he couldn't find any as the CU was obsolete. By this time the property had been uninsured for fire for 6 weeks; I told the electrician to go ahead and replace the CU (and remove some unused cabling). When you've got a couple of hundred grand of buildings partially uninsured, you are concerned about Sod's Law.

It may be that the insurance company accepted the wiring was ok, but I wanted the CU updated. Or they may have wanted it updated - I really can't remember.

A final comment. Some years later I happened to look at the wiring in the loft and was glad I'd had the CU updated. It was a rats nets of cabling, with some connector blocks in mid-air! Some of the lighting was earthed and some not, as the place had been built when the regs changed half-way through from not requiring earthed lighting, to it being necessary.

There is no requirement to change it, if it was to regs when installed - it's fine. Regulation changes are not retrospective.

Keep them as rentals for now I suppose.

Our insurance company insisted on the wiring being fixed within a short time - I don't recall how long.

The surveyor's comment "The wiring needs urgent attention" turned out to be because there was rubber wiring running through the thatch.

Andy

I take it this was a survey done when you bought the place. How did the insurance company find out about it?

Isn't straw an insulator ? :-)

When my rented cottage was struck by lightning,the insurance company insisted and paid for a rewire. The condition of what was left of the mains circuits could not be guranteed.

The same condition applies to cars that have been flooded. There is no knowing what electrical circuits have been corroded, or where water and diseases may end up lurking. They are automatically written off

Ouch

Insurance companies may insist on basic surveys being forwarded to them as a condition of insurance. In addition to a fully fireproofed thatched roof one year my insurance company insisted on a smoke alarm in the loft as well. It had been insured with them for 15 years without.

Yes.

And I can tell you it's really good a keeping the heat of the sun out, and less good at keeping the cold of winter out. Especially when it is windy.

Andy

There may not be a legal requirement but what's to stop the purchaser making it a condition of purchase? Would you buy a car you were not happy with just because it had passed its MOT?

Nothing, also nothing to stop the seller from walking.

Yes, if it was at the right price.