The world has gone mad!

What is the fused spur for? Could it be for something which might have been plugged in?

421.1.7 is muddled. "AFDD ... shall be provided for ... car homes". "For all other premises, [not Grenfell] the use of AFDDs ... is recommended ... for sockets". And it has to be at the origin, which can only mean a new DB.

Shall or recommended? Is this proportionate?

Looking from another angle, if you pop back in a couple of years to do a PIR, how will you code the work? Does the new bit get a different code from the old bits?

Looking from another angle,

According to the Best Practice Guide 4, the lack of AFDDs in care homes should be reported as a C3 observation. Does this mean that it is advisable to make improvements, but not mandatory.

AMK said:

According to the Best Practice Guide 4, the lack of AFDDs in care homes should be reported as a C3 observation. Does this mean that it is advisable to make improvements, but not mandatory.

Hence the point about raising it with the duty holder.

I have, of course, assumed that the radial in the circuit the OP is describing has socket-outlets.

Would it require a documented risk assessment like for omitting RCD protection, as required by Regulation 411.3.3 and attaching it to the minor work certificate?

AMK said:

Would it require a documented risk assessment like for omitting RCD protection, as required by Regulation 411.3.3 and attaching it to the minor work certificate?

BS 7671 doesn't require one. You can note that there isn't one on your certification also.

But if it were on a socket-outlet circuit, I think that it would be wise to bring it to the attention of the duty holder all the same.

I agree that the duty holder should be informed of this issue. Are there any case studies that demonstrate the advantages of installing AFDDs in care homes? Simply mentioning the regulation number on the certificate may not be enough. Perhaps it would be more effective to have a conversation with the duty holder about the risks of omitting AFDDs and the benefits of having them.

I agree that the duty holder should be informed of this issue. Are there any case studies that demonstrate the advantages of installing AFDDs in care homes? Simply mentioning the regulation number on the certificate may not be enough. Perhaps it would be more effective to have a conversation with the duty holder about the risks of omitting AFDDs and the benefits of having them.

AMK said:

Are there any case studies that demonstrate the advantages of installing AFDDs in care homes? Simply mentioning the regulation number on the certificate may not be enough.

Surely that's outside the remit of the electrician? Highlighting the fac that the standard requires them in some cases, and recommends them in others, is sufficient for the duty holder to consult a relevant fire safety professional on the impact of omitting the device on the fire safety risk assessment?

Unless of course the electrician were a suitably competent fire safety professional?