wrote:

Alteration to an existing circuit, and not in a special location, so no
- it is not notifiable.

How does that differ from the ruling that replacing damaged cable must run
via the same route and be identical in rating to the original?

That is a different circumstance slightly - it is saying you can replace
a cable without at the same time adding a socket or lighting point etc.
and it not count as installing a new circuit (which would be notifiable)

(although "same current capacity" is open to interpretation - i.e. you
could argue a larger cable can carry the same current)

If I was replacing damaged cable, I would certainly consider why it was
damaged, and re-route accordingly, but then it seems to be notifiable.

Unless you extended the circuit in the process... ;-)

The general guidance (additional notes - page 8) is that:

"b. Replacement, repair and maintenance jobs are generally not
notifiable, even if carried out in a kitchen or special location or
associated with a special installation."

So for prat P compliance if the cable is damaged you have to replace in the
same route?

I would guess they are avoiding the possibility of you altering the
design parameters of a circuit - changing the route may also change the
thermal environment of the cable etc.

If you know what you are doing it all becomes a bit of a nonsense anyway.

Then you can alter the circuit to move tha cable to a different route.

Prat P is a load of B*******!

Yup, can't argue with that!


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/