Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 449 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Splitting tails on crappy old installations.

justinneedham
Who uses the "Split the tails and ignore the faults" approach in domestic works? ( -Fondly used by many PV installers). 


-Where do you believe your responsibility ends, and how does the argument go if you might nonetheless be re-connecting tails to a potentially dangerous existing installation?
  • 0
    Personally I believe that we as professionals have a moral and legal duty to ensure a safe and reliable installation. If we see a potentially dangerous situation we should make the owner (and user if different) of the installation, aware of such.


    I normally check such things as smoke alarms with the owners permission. I ask when was the last time they were tested in a friendly way. Recently I found some mains interlinked ones that had life expired. "They were only installed recently" the owners said. Yes, but that was 10 years ago. They were about to let their thatched roof cottage.


    There is nothing wrong with connecting into tails if they are in good condition and adequately sized. It used to be the norm years ago when the fuse box was fully occupied and a new cooker circuit or shower circuit was to be installed. Back in the days of hot fuse wire and no R.C.D.s.


    Safety is paramount, and our reputations (or more) are at stake if we undertake work that is not safe and compliant.


    134.1.1.  131.1.2.


    Z.
  • 0
    Yes, I seem to come across a surprising number, and recently spent a whole week fixing basic wiring faults on a three bed house which included a separate board for their PV recently installed.

    Hence I don't especially want to be part of this trend.


    Yesterday I was called to a new customer. TT supply, no up-front RCD, no RCD’s at all. Ra 160 Ohms. Wylex fuseholders,

    They have limited budget and  they are going to turn down my quote for a replacement CU. I've explained the potential dangers. 


    Meanwhile, power for their garden log cabin is a “Must have”. I’m pretty sure that someone will be along to split the tails and just get on with it. Doing half a job “properly” implicitly acknowledges the potential dangers of what is there already. It’s a place I’ve avoided so far.

  • 0
    Justin I flatly refuse to do a cheap job. I will walk away if I can not do a good safe professional job. Recently a forum contributor said that a clear conscience is a soft pillow. A potential customer of mine wanted blue "caravan" sockets to supply swimming pool-side pumps and other outdoor electrical equipment, but he would NOT have R.C.D.s as they trip off and are a nuisance he said. I walked away.


    I take pride in achieving a good quality safe and reliable installation or alteration. Some people will spend lots of dosh on luxuries but scrimp on essentials like safe electrics. They are idiots and fools. I avoid them.


    Z.
  • 0
    That was my inclination. I think I'll quote for the "proper" way to do it as a package and they can chew on it.
  • 0

    Where do you believe your responsibility ends



    For me my responsibility is only for my work. Yes, I'll keep an eye out for problems with an existing installation, always advise about the dangers present and the advantages of upgrades/repairs, note such things on a cert of course (in the box provided), but ultimately it's the customer's/owner's responsibility. It's not up to me to dictate to the customer how they spend their money (or for me to do anything for free). So, for me splitting the tails (perhaps with an extra new main switch upstream...) and a new CU for the new work, while not ideal in many ways, is a legitimate option.


    Yesterday I was called to a new customer. TT supply, no up-front RCD, no RCD’s at all. Ra 160 Ohms. Wylex fuseholders,



    Things like that can be very interesting to analyse in detail. Long enough ago the regs permitted such arrangements - and as long as the circumstances are right, it's not necessarily as dangerous as it might first seem. If the earth fault currents are relatively low and metalwork within reach is effectively bonded together (or isolated from true earth) then the touch voltages within the building could be quite acceptable even without any disconnection at all.


       - Andy.
  • 0
    Well, I'm with Andy, 100% Horse, water etc.
  • 0
    When charging for an minimum of one hour including a call out I don’t mind tagging an additional job on within that time such as replacing a light switch.


    What does annoy me is when I have done a full hour then written up the invoice and taken the payment only to be asked to then of an additional job “ as I’m there”, do suddenly it’s become a hour and a halves work without the customer intending to offer payment for the additional half an hour.


    Regards the original post, adding an additional consumer unit requires all the required protective conductors to be in place, something that some installers don’t seem to realise.


    Andy B.

Community Rules & Guidelines