"Lightman" wrote in message
oups.com...
Dear all

The new Housing Act (shortly to take effect in a few days) meant that
I had to have two of my properties which are let as student houses
(HMO's) have their fixed wiring tested (so that I can now pay the
council a further £ 600 per property to register as a
landlord!!......something I have been doing since 1998 (with very
satisfied tenants who never leave).............it's all bureaucratic
nonsence really!!!)

This thread illustrates the problems that are likely to occur for Landlords
and Sellers in the future; when there is clamp down on conformance to the
regs and safe electrical installations. I suppose that there must be
justification for this new act, there are a lot of shady landlords out
there, from what I read.
Part P is another case in point, I can't argue with the principle from the
horrors that I've seen, the method: - Yes, (Licensed electricians would have
been preferable IMO).

I had NICEIC electricians inspect the wiring and issue PIR certificates

This does not guarantee competence.

My perfectly safe and very new wiring (which I did myself 3 years ago)
failed on one small point (in both houses). It failed as you
......."need a protective device for each ring main circuit".

These are now known as ring final circuits!, your NICEIC "inspector" should
have known this.

What I did is to put 2 small ring mains (two adjacent ground floor
rooms) into one 32amp MCB. This meant there was 4 tails in one 32 Amp
MCB. Each ring main is small and has 4 sockets and covers a very small
area. (It was done as rooms were renovated one after another and was
easier to wire like that. I combined some rooms on the ground floor as
the house has about 15 rooms (so I didn't want 15 ring mains with
15MCB's!!!!!!!!).

This is an example of the type of work that would be done by a DIY'r. It is
a departure from the regs; but in this case not unsafe for the user.

The NICEIC electricians informed me that if (they) put a joint box
behind the consumer unit (there is an access hatch) and make one larger
ring main (with 8 sockets) it will then comply!!

There are other ways in skinning the cat, see below. "Rules are made for
fools; and the interpretation of wise men".

What nonsence I say!! These wiring regulations would mean an increased
the length of the total ring main, increase the impedance and would
make it (slightly) less safe (not more!!). I really can't see that it
makes any difference! If you use the MCB as a "joint" it is not
allowed but "out of sight joint box " behind the consumer unit which
doubles the length of the ring main makes it comply!!

Providing that the disconnection time of the 32 Amp MCB; and the other
regulations regarding limit on the floor area etc. are met, I don't see a
problem.

Secondly they noted this as a "dangerous fail". I can't see how it
could be any worse than "not up to current wiring regulations". I can
possibly see that it is unsafe in any way as the MCB is 32 Amps which
is fine for each individual ring

I wouldn't consider it a dangerous fail, it is not strictly to the
regulations; but there should be at least a comment on the circuit
identification chart, at the distribution board, this "chart" is required to
the regulations. Further, as the duty holder, I would then comment on this
as a code 4 on the PIR: - "Does not comply with BS 7671: 2001 as amended.
The users of the installation are not in any danger as a result of the
discrepancy. Careful consideration should be given to the benefits of
improving these aspects of the installation."

Interestingly enough, this seems to be allowed with the lighting
circuits!!! It seems that one can shove in as many 1mm tails in those 6
Amp breakers as you like!!

Radial circuits as already mentioned elsewhere.

Any comments from anybody?? I'm jolly interested to see what the group
think!! ......and I especially want to hear from NICEIC electricians!!

Why NICEIC electricians as opposed to ECA or NAPIT, or simply competent
electricians?; the NICEIC don't write the regulations; they think they do.
As an organisation they are not very user friendly; even though they are a
charity organisation; I understand that anyone can phone their helpline,
although there may be a long wait for an answer, I would bounce this off
them. There are two categories of NICEIC electricians here, one is a
Domestic Installer, who can't be registered by them to carry out PIR's, the
other is the Approved Contractor who is registered. Which category applies
here?, if the former; does he have at least C & G 2391 which applies to this
category of work?
What does this new housing act, stipulate for inspector
competence/qualifications, in this regard? Note that PIR's don't fall under
Part P of the building regulations, anyone can do them.

Best regards - Lightman
(now a qualified PAT tester with 96.666% in that stupid City & Guilds
test which is also a bureacratic waste of time but saves on PAT testing
fees!!!!)

This is certainly not work for Von Braun, (try City & Guilds 2391, a bit
more difficult; but again.......). Doesn't this PAT fee come under
maintenance; which is allowed as a tax deduction?

BTW, there is no mention of an RCD; I assume this is installed.

Jaymack