It's not a question of BS7671, ESQCR or any other "rules and regulations", it is physics.

You are all too polite while being held to ransom by idiots who do not understand. Are they equally incompetent with their own work?

Can you not explain to these fools that even if you needlessly insert a length of copper pipe into the plastic supply, that piece of pipe still does not require bonding.

The answer is easy, is sad, 'NO' - most law makers do not understand electricity, and sometimes I wonder if this extends to some who work with it too.

Mike

The answer is easy, is sad, 'NO' - most law makers do not understand electricity, and sometimes I wonder if this extends to some who work with it too.

Mike

I do not know which is more absurd: (a) inserting a length of copper pipe and bonding it; or (b) just putting the bonding clamp around the plastic pipe.

Even better would be splitting a piece of plastic pipe and putting it around a copper (+/- lead) supply; and then putting the bonding clamp around both.

I may be mistaken, but on initial verification, should you not test for continuity between the pipe and the MET. That will not work well with a plastic pipe!

Indeed Mike, the science has been thrown out in pursuit of commercial gain these days - You no longer have to PROVE, you just have to BELIEVE!

AFDDs are a good recent example of this.