Tea and sympathy or tough luck?

I always harbour a degree of empathy with contractors....been at the coal face myself for many years and I am well aware of the ups and downs.

However, I am not sure that I would warm the teapot and get the buns out in this case.

A contractor friend just completed 112 mid-range dwellings. He and the guys working for him are meticulously neat but far too nonchalant when it comes to regulatory requirements.

The site is complete, not one single EIC asked for or issued. That is until one of the last people to purchase one of the units was a contractor specialising in electrical I+T. That contractor identified the lack of certification and a number of concerning issues in his own home. 

1. 16mm2 tails almost 15m in length supplied directly via an isolator from mains intake in the cubicle recessed in the exterior wall to a remote consumer unit. 100A service head fuse in each property (confirmed by NIE). 

2. Cables enter the consumer unit from the rear without fire stopping. Timber frame house.

3. Ground floor ceilings peppered with downlights with a suggestion that this is unacceptable and

4. No certification issued and no inspection and testing carried out for any of the properties.

  • Interesting, but tough luck for whom?

    1. Can be sorted by installing a switch-fuse, rated for the installation method.

    2. Add fire stopping.

    3. Depends upon the fire rating of the lamp fittings. Presumably the purchaser was aware of them when he decided to buy, so not a lot of sympathy for this one.

    4. Easy enough to issue an EIC, but harder to do the I&T.

    None of it seems to be insurmountable. Be very very nice to the purchaser before he talks to his new neighbours. :-)

  • 1. Can be sorted by installing a switch-fuse, rated for the installation method.

    If a lower rating would be suitable - over here new dwellings are meant to include a EV charge point, so there may not be much room for manoeuvre.  Where to locate such a switch-fuse?, unless NIE are more tolerant than those here, the meter cabinet won't be acceptable. Also if the cables is shallow concealed in walls, 30mA RCD requirement (which you probably wouldn't want up-front).

      -  Andy.

  • That’s the problem Chris, it has already gone to the developer who seems to have been unaware of the EIC requirement and of the finer regulatory issues. We don’t have Part P equivalent here, NHBC requirements can be side stepped by using a chartered architect, and the contractor isn’t registered with a CPS so no imperative to provide certification of the electrical installation in such circumstances.
    There are 112 houses that need to be certified to BS7671 2018 and that means attending to any issues that might be in conflict with that standard including addressing those tricky considerations that AJ has alluded to.

    I am told that the developer wants matters put right and no compromises or pay offs tolerated. The electrical contractor reckons around £30K. I am sure that plenty of the residents will not want workmen plodding about their new house, fearful of damage to decor, carpets, furniture etc.

    The developer could end up with the problem on his plate as the electrical contractor could simply cut his losses. It is one reason that we specify NICEIC registered contractors for any designs leaving our office, even for simple, minimal cost jobs.

  • Wooden buildings…… £50 says 422.4 hasn’t been applied either if it’s applicable up over your way Lyle?

  • 422.4.203 in particular

    i understand that FP or similar is required here? Metal Conduit,trunking, Xlpe, is allowed I think,

    is white tw&e  allowed? 

    I know European cables differ to ours - how applicable is this reg over there?

  • Wooden buildings…

    Humm maybe.  To my mind there isn't a huge amount of difference between a modern timer framed house and a conventional masonry build one - even in a traditional brick build, floors will be timber, likewise many of the internal walls, staircases, ceilings and roof. Often the only difference between timber frame and so brick built is that the inner leaf of the outside walls - everything else maybe just the same. If either have a decent fire and they're gutted and usually a write-off.

    Typically it's the plasterboard that contains fire (for a while at least)- timber structures that lack that (e.g. log cabin style or old exposed timber and thatch roof cottages) might be a different kettle of fish of course.

        - Andy.

  • In any event it looks like ordinary T&E may meet  BS EN 60332-1-2 - e.g. https://www.elandcables.com/media/38169/bs6004-624y-twin-and-earth-pvc-cable.pdf

      - Andy.

  • Given it is you Lyle, is this BS7671 land or  Eire ?

    What is the problem with 1,

    If the DNO are happy with it, perhaps a concession to use their fuse may be possible.  Perhaps the problem is not real, only administrative.

    2) is a squirt off mastic enough.

    3) are up and downstairs different fire zones ?

    4) well, I;m sure some realistic results can be  created over a few pints...

    M

  • Mike,

    If you go out the back door of one of the houses and spit hard enough it might just land in another country, but the estate is definitely in 7671 land.

    For 1) The tails are 16mm2 so unless NIE were up for changing to 80A devices, overload, at least as determined by 433.1.1, would not be in place.

    For 2) maybe, for 3) it is a fair point but 30min REI is the minimum period of fire resistance. Whilst I cannot conceive how a few downlights would impact on that requirement, I am not aware of any tests to confirm otherwise. 

    For 4) Love it!

  • Apologies, I had missed the 100A fuse (not quite) covering cables rated at 94A or less dependent on routing.. Perhaps by way of excuse,  I have recently come back from South America, and I am not really fully back in the correct UK regs mental state and the insulated and sheathed current ratings  - actually there is rather a large expectation gap (!)- what you describe would be just fine out there....

    The real tragedy by the sound of it, is that the same noddy errors have been made 100 times in rapid succession -  if it was juxt the one, then it would  be a failry quick fix.

    Please realise my solution to pt 4 was a bit tongue in cheek, but perhaps represents fairly common mainland UK practice at the shallower end of the workforce.

    Mike.