Landlord electrical safety certificate

Grumpy

I outlined why plastic consumer units are not inherently unsafe above. The problem really is that Sparkingchip and one or two other posts seem to dispute this. The regulations themselves in Section 6 make it very clear that non-dangerous items and installations to previous editions are permitted for continued use. The problem of the London fires and the solution is possibly not the best way to deal with the problem. This problem is exactly the same throughout the Electrical industry, loose connections ARE inherently dangerous, be it in DNO cables or consumer appliances. As there is no difference between the connections in a metal or plastic CU, both rely completely on tight connections, and there is probably no difference in their ability to catch fire in the bigger scheme of things. There is a bit more inflammable material in a plastic one, and fireproof enclosure means one which is sealed to the air (ATEX) so that things simply cannot burn, however hot they get. A fire can certainly start in a metal CU, burn the MCBs, etc. and all the cables giving off a great deal of heat. Whether this starts a fire is largely a case of luck, if it is all contained in a concrete room with a metal door, then probably not, if under a wooden staircase, perhaps. I have yet to see any non-inflammable enclosure around a CU (meaning: fully sealed) and no inflammable material being used. A wooden framed cement fibre box with gaps around the joints and door is clearly useless. It may delay the fire, but unless there is a fire alarm sensor, does little good in the long term. There will not be a fire if all the terminals are tight, and this is part of an EICR, showing that they might be a good idea. Remember that to burn a fire needs a large supply of oxygen. Take this away and nothing much will happen. Burning takes roughly the same weight of oxygen as of the fuel material, so about 5 times the weight of air. That really is quite a lot!

Grumpy

I outlined why plastic consumer units are not inherently unsafe above. The problem really is that Sparkingchip and one or two other posts seem to dispute this. The regulations themselves in Section 6 make it very clear that non-dangerous items and installations to previous editions are permitted for continued use. The problem of the London fires and the solution is possibly not the best way to deal with the problem. This problem is exactly the same throughout the Electrical industry, loose connections ARE inherently dangerous, be it in DNO cables or consumer appliances. As there is no difference between the connections in a metal or plastic CU, both rely completely on tight connections, and there is probably no difference in their ability to catch fire in the bigger scheme of things. There is a bit more inflammable material in a plastic one, and fireproof enclosure means one which is sealed to the air (ATEX) so that things simply cannot burn, however hot they get. A fire can certainly start in a metal CU, burn the MCBs, etc. and all the cables giving off a great deal of heat. Whether this starts a fire is largely a case of luck, if it is all contained in a concrete room with a metal door, then probably not, if under a wooden staircase, perhaps. I have yet to see any non-inflammable enclosure around a CU (meaning: fully sealed) and no inflammable material being used. A wooden framed cement fibre box with gaps around the joints and door is clearly useless. It may delay the fire, but unless there is a fire alarm sensor, does little good in the long term. There will not be a fire if all the terminals are tight, and this is part of an EICR, showing that they might be a good idea. Remember that to burn a fire needs a large supply of oxygen. Take this away and nothing much will happen. Burning takes roughly the same weight of oxygen as of the fuel material, so about 5 times the weight of air. That really is quite a lot!