Is this junction box installation acceptable?

Thanks all for your input.

This is not the result of any equipment being moved, it is a collection of new lighting circuits in an extension that have been grouped together for connection in a central point. This box has been presented supplementary to all the hidden connections in the ceiling that were used to modify the existing circuits.

There is a lid to the box and access from above would be through the floor, so not an issue.

There are some unsheathed cables outside the box, I haven't yet been closer to pull them out, there is also a collection of PE in the Wago strip, I'm guessing he ran out of terminal space. I'm pretty sure one of these is clamped around the earth sleeve

The quality of the installation is just naff, including chewed out hole and spray foam, but I recognise that people have different levels and abilities of this. I'm not sure why the cables had to move from the original hole but I'm bored of asking my builder about cosmetic issues now.

My concern is the gaping hole, my understanding is that it is not appropriate for electrical installation and that the cable entries should be sealed to prevent the spread of fire.

Thanks all for your input.

This is not the result of any equipment being moved, it is a collection of new lighting circuits in an extension that have been grouped together for connection in a central point. This box has been presented supplementary to all the hidden connections in the ceiling that were used to modify the existing circuits.

There is a lid to the box and access from above would be through the floor, so not an issue.

There are some unsheathed cables outside the box, I haven't yet been closer to pull them out, there is also a collection of PE in the Wago strip, I'm guessing he ran out of terminal space. I'm pretty sure one of these is clamped around the earth sleeve

The quality of the installation is just naff, including chewed out hole and spray foam, but I recognise that people have different levels and abilities of this. I'm not sure why the cables had to move from the original hole but I'm bored of asking my builder about cosmetic issues now.

My concern is the gaping hole, my understanding is that it is not appropriate for electrical installation and that the cable entries should be sealed to prevent the spread of fire.

Is the ceiling that has been cut a fire break between 2 independent zones ?  If so then a hole that size might compromise it.

Or to check this, is it 2 layers of plasterboard or it is the pink stuff that is fire rated?

Normally in a 'standard'  house with 2 floors and one set of stairs, upstairs and downstairs are one zone, But situations like granny flats or a third habitable floor can change this.

It's not exactly first class neat work but it may not be a wiring regs or building regs fail.

There are some builders sadly who seem to specialize in bumbling along near the shallow end  of the acceptable.

Perhaps if you have not seen it already ask for the paperwork - there should be new installation (or perhaps just minor works if its a small extension)   certs and the some test results. That often results in a rash of activity, and it not being available  would be  a regs fail, albeit a very common one.

Mike.

So, the box is mounted on some boxing that runs front to back on the house, just the other side of the wall to the right is a steel, the plasterboard installed here was pink, I'm not sure and doubt that the plasterboard here is pink, definitely not double

it is a normal standard house, I'm not aware of fire zones.

I think the works fits as minor works as it was all modification of existing circuits, should I expect a minor works certificate? I think they are planning to provide EICR only

There should be a minor works certificate (example - though 'circuit details' would require duplicetion as here there are several circuits) or the equivalent information presented another way.

There may not be a full set of tests as per a full EIC, but the new work should have some sort of earth continuity tests, either dead tests before connection or a Zs afterwards, and I'd expect to see RCD trip times verified. If the EICR was done after the new work, that's OK as the test coverage and reported test results are similar (model forms), but usually it is done before, to avoid surprises when hooking on. It is true to say that there is quite wide variation in the degree to which this is taken seriously - especially the extrapolation from sampling only part of the installation rather than the whole of it.

Mike