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 102 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 8589 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

Shock Likelihood at Switch.

Zoomup
Mornin' All,


I have just inspected and tested a renovated  old flat's wiring. The original lighting wiring in places has no circuit protective conductor. The owner has installed metal plate light switches to two positions with wooden back boxes. At these two positions there is no circuit protective conductor. The flat has a new R.C.B.O. consumer unit and all other wiring is good.


I have recommended that the switches have a C.P.C. installed (difficult and disruptive) or be changed to all insulated types.


Just what is the shock risk at these two switch positions? What is the likelihood of the metal plates becoming live due to a fault? Has anyone every seen a metal plate switch break down so that the plates becomes live?


Thanks,


Z.

Parents
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    My P.L. insurer would be more concerned if: 1. I had not found the non earthed metal switches.

    AND

    2. I had not recommended that an improvement was needed noting the reason why.


    But you have still classed the installation as Satisfactory even in light of the signed declaration:


    Overall assessment of the installation in terms of its suitability for continued use

                                                 SATISFACTORY/UNSATISFACTORY


    This declaration is standalone and I for one would not wish to try and explain why I had given a Code C3 that should only be given due consideration.


    We all know how much consideration a consumer faced with remedial work will give it............


    As to the view that it is unlikely to happen, if you're in court, it did happen! Besides which, people still buy lottery tickets knowing that it is unlikely to be the jackpot ticket...... But it could happen............ There was some time ago a comparison between the likelihood of getting 4, 5, 6 numbers correlated with loss of limbs, sight etc. Not good reading.


    Regards


    BOD



Reply
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    My P.L. insurer would be more concerned if: 1. I had not found the non earthed metal switches.

    AND

    2. I had not recommended that an improvement was needed noting the reason why.


    But you have still classed the installation as Satisfactory even in light of the signed declaration:


    Overall assessment of the installation in terms of its suitability for continued use

                                                 SATISFACTORY/UNSATISFACTORY


    This declaration is standalone and I for one would not wish to try and explain why I had given a Code C3 that should only be given due consideration.


    We all know how much consideration a consumer faced with remedial work will give it............


    As to the view that it is unlikely to happen, if you're in court, it did happen! Besides which, people still buy lottery tickets knowing that it is unlikely to be the jackpot ticket...... But it could happen............ There was some time ago a comparison between the likelihood of getting 4, 5, 6 numbers correlated with loss of limbs, sight etc. Not good reading.


    Regards


    BOD



Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines