I am completely re-wiring by house and taking the opportunity to install an Ethernet network with Cat6 cable. Is such wiring covered by IEE Wiring Regs? Can anyone suggest a specification for such cable? For example do I need CMP (plenum rated cables) for use in soffits, CMR rated cable when going between floors, or can I just use general purpose CM rated Low Smoke Zero Halogen cables throughout?” It would be useful to distinguish between legal requirement, best practice, common use
Thanks to all for your contributions some of which I want to expand upon - see below.
I found a useful summary of BS7671 requirements at:
My understanding is that Band 1 circuits (data comms, alarm, extra low voltage <50V ac, 120V DC) and band 2 circuits (220V AC lighting and power) must be separated. In the context of a domestic house, this seems to mean that they should not share the same conduit in walls/floors and that bundles of cables should not mix Band 1 and Band 2 cables and each should be separated in cable trunking (shelves) by 10cm, or put into separate compartments. Furthermore there should be protection against premature collapse in the event of a fire; a requirement that could be met by putting cable bundles located above false ceilings in metal trunking. There is also mention of the need to separate electrical cabling from non-electrical services like water pipes though close proximity is permitted if steps are taken to protect the wiring from damage, for example from a burst pipe.
In terms of the requirements for the cables themselves, it seems that they must be appropriately insulated; >220V for power/lighting and >50v ac for extra low voltage. However, the requirements for safety in case of fire do not seem to be specified in BS 7671, but instead are referenced in BS6701 (as mentioned by gkenyon). I found a useful summary at:
It seems responsibilities for the installation of telecommunications equipment and telecommunications cabling are divided between the installer and the owner of the premises housing the telecommunications systems referred to hereinafter as the “premises owner”. A reasonable definition of 'premises' is a house or building, together with its land and outbuildings, occupied by a business. Therefore does BS6701 apply to a domestic house? Is there any case law on this issue? That issue apart, there is sense in me specifying cables that are BS EN 13501‑6 compliant - CPR Euroclass Cca,s1b,d2,a2
Summary
Clearly, it is not sensible to apply the same requirements for wiring systems in a factory or office block to the rewiring of my house. Even the requirements for a high-rise block of flats (Grenfell) are very different to those of a three story town house in single occupation like mine. It is unrealistic to expect home owners to spend many thousands of pounds employing consultants to obtain the documentation required by BS EN 13501-6 / 50174 in terms of specification, design, implementation and testing of a cable system that is just a single CAT5 cable running from the router in their basement to a network switch in their bedroom. Admittedly my proposed network is a little more complex, but the point is the same - some common sense is needed.
Given the increasing use of CAT5/6/7 cable in people's homes it would be useful for the IET to produce a guide on the subject. It should cover the minimum legal requirements to satisfy UK wiring regulations and also suggestions for best practice. In the absence of such a guide I am proposing without the intention to provide any form of professional guidance:
I should be grateful for any further comments and suggestions on the above.
Therefore does BS6701 apply to a domestic house? Is there any case law on this issue?
Yes, the scope of BS 6701 is not limited to any particular class of premises.
The division of responsibility between the owner and installer is a matter of contract. So if the contract specifies that the telecoms equipment shall be installed i.a.w. BS 6701 and it is not, the installer is in breach.
I am not clear which specific issue you think might have given rise to case law. The interpretation of "premises" might be context specific, but if there were any case law on its definition (I am not sure that there is) it would simply be the ordinary meaning of the word.
just a single CAT5 cable running from the router in their basement to a network switch in their bedroom. Admittedly my proposed network is a little more complex, but the point is the same - some common sense is needed.
Given the increasing use of CAT5/6/7 cable in people's homes
Been there done that - before we had wifi, I ran a cable between Mrs P's office and mine in order to connect her PC to the router. That became obsolete when we got iPads so I would be surprised if the installation of networks is increasing.
That became obsolete when we got iPads so I would be surprised if the installation of networks is increasing.
Still needed in my house. Interior brick walls mean we need wired between parts of the house to make WiFi available everywhere ... and it's not that big either!
Yes, the scope of BS 6701 is not limited to any particular class of premises.
The division of responsibility between the owner and installer is a matter of contract. So if the contract specifies that the telecoms equipment shall be installed i.a.w. BS 6701 and it is not, the installer is in breach.
I think it's a little more than that.
First, BS 7671 makes reference to BS 6701 for telecomms cabling, so you can't really comply with BS 7671 without BS 6701.
Second, the standard does contain some requirements for safety - so if anything does go wrong, and you didn't comply with BS 6701 (but doing so would have led to a different outcome) ....
WiFi isn't a good solution in any room which is more than 15-20m from the Access Point, particularly for 5GHz. In property with thick walls it's even worse. My experience of WiFi extenders has been poor. There really isn't any substitute for wired ethernet in a largish house. I can't accept that use is decreasing.
I suspect that BS6701 makes no explicit reference to installation, use, and maintenance of Cat5/6/7 in a domestic house, but does give details of such in factories, offices, hospitals, etc. Therefore it could be argued that BS6701 was not intended to cover a house rewiring project. This is also an argument for common sense as its requirements are too onerous for homeowners and add no value. In the words of Lord Denning, ‘Equity comes in, true to form, to mitigate the rigours of strict law’ I cannot imagine a successful prosecution being made against a homeowner for not complying with BS 6701 in respect of Cat5/6/7 wiring in their home. Does anyone know of such a case? It is enough that reasonable care was taken - see my list of proposals.
I was merely pointing out that no class of premises is excluded - there is no exemption; and if something does go wrong, and it was as a result of non-compliance, the contractor may be liable not only in breach of contract, but also in tort.
So, best to comply!
So what do you do? Do you (and wpqs) have multiple routers dotted about the house?
We have one repeater, but more could be justified. Somehow, however, I don't find a need for my iPad in the kitchen just as much as I don't do any cooking in my office.
Therefore it could be argued that BS6701 was not intended to cover a house rewiring project. This is also an argument for common sense as its requirements are too onerous for homeowners and add no value. In the words of Lord Denning, ‘Equity comes in, true to form, to mitigate the rigours of strict law’ I cannot imagine a successful prosecution being made against a homeowner for not complying with BS 6701 in respect of Cat5/6/7 wiring in their home. Does anyone know of such a case? It is enough that reasonable care was taken - see my list of proposals.
I disagree: the scope of BS 6701 does not exclude domestic premises. However, there is no statutory requirement to comply and failure to do so would not be an offence.
Yes, it is a defence in tort that reasonable care was taken. The advantage of complying with BS 6701 (or any other standard), and having evidence to demonstrate it (e.g. an EIC), is that it is so much easier to make one's case with as opposed to without compliance.
Equity, in the legal sense, has little or nothing to do with it.
Therefore it could be argued that BS6701 was not intended to cover a house rewiring project. This is also an argument for common sense as its requirements are too onerous for homeowners and add no value. In the words of Lord Denning, ‘Equity comes in, true to form, to mitigate the rigours of strict law’ I cannot imagine a successful prosecution being made against a homeowner for not complying with BS 6701 in respect of Cat5/6/7 wiring in their home. Does anyone know of such a case? It is enough that reasonable care was taken - see my list of proposals.
I disagree: the scope of BS 6701 does not exclude domestic premises. However, there is no statutory requirement to comply and failure to do so would not be an offence.
Yes, it is a defence in tort that reasonable care was taken. The advantage of complying with BS 6701 (or any other standard), and having evidence to demonstrate it (e.g. an EIC), is that it is so much easier to make one's case with as opposed to without compliance.
Equity, in the legal sense, has little or nothing to do with it.
We're about to take you to the IET registration website. Don't worry though, you'll be sent straight back to the community after completing the registration.
Continue to the IET registration site
