I eventually finished my En-Suite (about a year!). Got the BI to check and (as I had already mentioned para 1.26) he agreed to get the Part P done! I await the contractor, but while the BI was here, he seemed to imply the whole house would be checked, can this be correct? I can understand the need to check its safe, but I only wanted hime to check my additional wiring. While he vivited he did bring out a meter and checked the earth impedance (7.5ohm) which he said was good for my installation (overhead power lines) whi should be less than 33ohms. I did find out the other day that the power company has put down earths on every 5th pole and I can have an earth terminal put on my neutral cable for free, should I do this in future? I cannot rember the terminology (TT and TMG I think).
Unless the additional wiring is on its own circuits back to the CU, then the existing wiring needs to be compliant to the extent necessary for the new wiring to comply, if you see what I mean. You can expect the main bonding to services to be checked, for example.
TT (earth rod) or PME (Protectivive Multiple Earithing)
Well when adding extra stuff, there are some aspects like main equipotential bonding that must also be brought up to current standards if not compliant since that will affect the safety of the work you have done.
7.5 is actually quite good... For comparison I get about 11 ohms here with a heavy clay soil. Not sure where the 33 comes from though. With a RCD protected TT system you can cope with worse impedances than that.
The combined Protective Earth and Neutral option (a PEN conductor), would give you a TN-C-S and PME supply. You currently have TT.
It is appropriate to check at least some aspects, such as earthing including service bonding. It's up to the BI how much is checked and at what level. The intention of Part P wasn't a full electrical inspection but just a quick inspection by the BI as they do for anything else they check. Most LA's have gone way OTT.
Yes, it makes it easier to provide a well protected wiring installation.
PME or TN-C-S. (TT is what you have now, I suspect.)
Hmmmm..... I need to update the bonding I think. I have no electrics in the shower and have plastic plumbing to it so have done no bonding? I have a lighting mirror that is earthed back through a lighting ring?
My gas pipe from the meter has bonding back to the board and my s/steel sink has bonding to some old mains copper water pipe (but the input to this into the house has been changed to plastic
When moved into the house I also stuck in a 1 metre earth spike and put that back to the board!
Is there anything I need across the boiler (from the gas to the C/H)?
Any other comments before I let the Contractor in!?
If I have to do some additions what is the sizes of bonding I would need please?
In a shower you would only need to equipotential bond things that could introduce a potential into the space. So if all the plumbing is plastic, and the only power circuit to supply the room is the lighting then there is likely nothing to do. If there is more than one power circuit - say lighting and a shower, then the earth conductors of the two circuits ought to be bonded to each other.
The gas pipe sounds fine if the wire is of the correct size (typically
10mm^2 if you have a TN-S or TN-C-S supply, or 6mm^2 on TT).
The kitchen sink does not require a bond at all. (kitchens are not "special locations" anyway).
If the house cold water pipes are metal, then there should be a main bond to the cold water supply where it enters the house (even if the supply itself is plastic)
Do you have RCD protection for the whole house, or does it still have an older voltage operated ELCB?
formatting link
Is there anything I need across the boiler (from the gas to the C/H)? Many fitters will routinely bond all the pipes in and out of the boiler. Whether this is actually required seems to be open to debate though unless the boiler is in a special location.
The On Site Guide is the book for electricians wiring up small and simple installations that aren't designed by electrical engineers. AFAIK it has no legal force, unlike the Regs.
Surely the IEE regulations don't have any legal force either, they are not 'the law', they are just the accepted standards used for wiring in this country. The OSG is a summary of how one can implement domestic wiring so that it complies with the regulations without having to do the calculations from first principles that would be needed if you worked direct from the regulations.
They are the British Standard cited in the Building Regulations (Scotland) and have been for a long while, which means they have the force of law in that they are the standard to which installations *must* comply, unless you can prove that they comply to an alternative but equivalent (ie Harmonised) standard.
Not sure of the *exact* status in E&W after Part Pee, but similar.
Exactly; but you can't say that you've designed an installation to comply with the OSG. It has to comply with the IEE Regs. You can ignore the OSG if you want to.
Whilst Building Regulations are under discussion - does anyone know the exact definition of "should" and "must" in this context? e.g Part P has 50 "shoulds" and 34 "musts". As I understand it a "must" clause is a legal requirement but a "should" is best practice and provided a "solution" meets the spirit/reason for the clause it may be acceptable.
I don't think Building Regs would claim to conform to RFC2119. Part P in particular would have a real struggle claiming conformance with anything logical.
That's what I was told when dealing with my contracts department in the MOD many years ago!
The reason I am writing is to update you all on the saga!
The BI said about 6 weeks ago that HE would get a local firm (Quadran) who normally deal with local housing, to come and inspect. Last week I phoned them, they had no job outstanding! Phoned BI who said "I was just thinking about you"!!! Oh no not more delays - He then said he "thought" I would not need any inspection but should fill in a "Minor Electrical Works Certificate" but without the testing!!! I have done the description and how the existing circuits are protected but nothing of its compliance to the latest regulations. Seems almost worthless to me but he seemed to think it would be acceptable.
Our local council is undergoing some major cutbacks to stay within budget and this might have something to do with his attitude.
I hand posted the form yesterday with a note asking him to let me know by Christmas if it was suitable and, if not, what he was going to do!!
Below mail left for some further > Owa>>> I eventually finished my En-Suite (about a year!).
Just before Christmas I got my ne-suite approved.
The BI visited but I heard nothing for a couple of months!! Rang him and he said, "I was just thinking about your installation"!!
He then said it MAY not require testing as it was changes to the existing wiring! I did not really agree, but said he was the Boss and if that was his decision......
He eventually said he thought that if I could fill in parts of the form on what I had done, then the would probably accept it!
I said I had not tested it and would not sign to say I had.
He sent the form, I wrote what I had done, but not that the whole installation was to the latest regulations.
I thought this was not sufficient and that he would still insist on getting it tested.
After more delay, I phoned and asked what was happening, he then said "I think we have pursued this as far as necessary" and an approval would be issued.
I think I managed to wear him down, but I never once accepted that I had to pay for an inspection. I do not know if the council (North Somerset) now stipulate it as a condition of an application though, but it did not a year ago, so I did accept I had to pay. There has also been significant cuts to funding since another party took over the council last year and I understand that this may have affected the outcome!
Luckily I had plenty of time to let the saga drag on but appreciate some readers may not be in my position.
Thanks for all the help in saving me (and others) the costs of inspections, keep up the good work.
I thought my saga was a long one but my neighbour had a large extension put up 3 years ago and still has not got it passed. He had a side window on the first floor approved then after it was completed the BI said it was too high for a fire escape (new regulations). My neighbour had to fit a wooden box to stand on, but when the BI did a spot check my neighbour had put the box in his loft!!
This is up to the BCO -- there is no requirement for them to have an installation tested. It was never originally envisaged that every installation would be tested as part of the approval, just that the BCO would glance at it like they do most other things.
I got caught by that one too. The architect who designed the loft conversion was aware of the maximum sill height of 1200mm for a designated escape window, but his drawings were not sufficiently explicit. When the builder framed the opening for the Velux window,
1200mm became the height from the floor to the top edge of his nogging. Then along came the BCO, who quite reasonably measured to the bottom of the installed Velux frame; and of course he found it about 80mm too high.
We 'negotiated' about this. The BCO agreed that it would be very easy to climb out using the solidly built desktop that was fixed to the wall below the window, but that wouldn't count because it's 'furniture'. There had to be a step on the floor. Then I asked him how he wanted this step to be fixed, and he didn't answer that question... or not exactly. Instead, he looked me straight in the eye and said, very slowly and with heavy emphasis, "I want to *see* a step in place, when I come back to inspect."
So this was duly done - but come re-inspection time, it was a different BCO! Having duly verified that the height from step to sill was now within regs, the next thing he asked was "Is that step fixed?" This time it was *my* turn to do the looking-in-the-eye and heavy emphasis: "What your colleague asked for was... and that's exactly what you see here."
It got me a very dirty look - but also a completion certificate.
The fixed desktop is still here (I'm typing on it now). It provides an admirably solid means of escape, in two equal steps of less than a metre each.
As for the step on the floor, I couldn't possibly comment further...
HomeOwnersHub website 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.