A heads-up that Amendment 3 to the wiring regs (due in January) will require
home consumer units to be made of a non-combustable material (i.e. metal),
or to be enclosed in a non-combustable enclosure. This follows a five fold
increase in 5 years of house fires starting in plastic consumer units,
often under the stairs, which are usually the only escape route. This
applies to any other switchgear too, not just the CU.

The new requirement will be delayed until January 2016, to allow
manufacturers time to produce metal consumer units in sufficient numbers.

Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.

--
Andrew Gabriel

On 12/12/2014 00:17, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
A heads-up that Amendment 3 to the wiring regs (due in January) will require
home consumer units to be made of a non-combustable material (i.e. metal),
or to be enclosed in a non-combustable enclosure. This follows a five fold
increase in 5 years of house fires starting in plastic consumer units,
often under the stairs, which are usually the only escape route. This
applies to any other switchgear too, not just the CU.

The new requirement will be delayed until January 2016, to allow
manufacturers time to produce metal consumer units in sufficient numbers.

Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.


Surprised it's taken this long and personally I have always thought that
having the mains incommer, switchgear and commonly the gas as well,
under the stairs is just stupid.

Maybe one of the ways to "punish" the excessive profits of the energy
companies would be to require them to relocate the supplies to the
outside wall - of course they'd never agree to it

Does this mean that TT installations will again need an RCD before the
CU?

(I accept a fair answer to me would be "find and read the amendment to
you lazy c***.)

--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

Andrew Gabriel wrote:
Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.

I've always felt those modern floppy plastic things were no patch over
a proper thermosetting Wylex box and was amazed they were considered
compliant.

jgh

Its very funny, cos my old original 1939 one with wire fuses was made of
metal with little bakalite covers for the fuses. Some plastics do not burn
but do melt and give off nasty fumes as they do so. I always thought it was
a bad idea to use anything that can be toxic.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
A heads-up that Amendment 3 to the wiring regs (due in January) will
require
home consumer units to be made of a non-combustable material (i.e. metal),
or to be enclosed in a non-combustable enclosure. This follows a five fold
increase in 5 years of house fires starting in plastic consumer units,
often under the stairs, which are usually the only escape route. This
applies to any other switchgear too, not just the CU.

The new requirement will be delayed until January 2016, to allow
manufacturers time to produce metal consumer units in sufficient numbers.

Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.

--
Andrew Gabriel

On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 08:18:19 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:

Is it retrospective, i.e. will everyone with a plastic CU have to get
it changed immediately or within a limited time period, or is it only
for CU's in new-builds or when one is changed during a house refurb?

Very rarely is any change in any regulation retrospective. It raises
the "who pays" spectre and no one want's to (or has the money).

I'd be very surprised it applied to anything other than new build or
replacement.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article ,
Chris Hogg writes:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 00:17:42 +0000 (UTC),
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:

A heads-up that Amendment 3 to the wiring regs (due in January) will require
home consumer units to be made of a non-combustable material (i.e. metal),
or to be enclosed in a non-combustable enclosure. This follows a five fold
increase in 5 years of house fires starting in plastic consumer units,
often under the stairs, which are usually the only escape route. This
applies to any other switchgear too, not just the CU.

The new requirement will be delayed until January 2016, to allow
manufacturers time to produce metal consumer units in sufficient numbers.

Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.

Is it retrospective, i.e. will everyone with a plastic CU have to get
it changed immediately or within a limited time period, or is it only
for CU's in new-builds or when one is changed during a house refurb?

Wiring regs are never retrospective.

The nearest they came to retrospective was the changes in 17th Edition
which could be interpreted to require substantial upgrades when adding
to a circuit to make the existing parts of the circuit conform.
Many BCO's seem to have taken the view in such cases that the whole
circuit can continue to conform to 16th edition regs.

--
Andrew Gabriel

In article ,
"Robin" writes:
Does this mean that TT installations will again need an RCD before the
CU?

No.
(They never did, although that was the cheapest option before having a
single RCD protecting all circuits was explicitly called out as non-
conforming.)

(I accept a fair answer to me would be "find and read the amendment to
you lazy c***.)

It's not avalable yet.

--
Andrew Gabriel

On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 01:37:37 +0000, Lee wrote:

Maybe one of the ways to "punish" the excessive profits of the energy
companies would be to require them to relocate the supplies to the
outside wall - of course they'd never agree to it

Many places that would be very difficult and it would probably be
better to scrap the entire supply infrastructure and install new.
Thinking ordinary streets with the supplies buried *somewhere* under
the houses to a main *somewhere* under the street or front gardens.
You could dig up each junction and connect a new supply cable to the
old leaving the old in thr ground but some of this stuf will be old
('30's semis may well be still be fed by orginal cabling, so 80 odd
years old). Start poking it and it's going to break or become
unreliable...

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 00:17:42 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

This follows a five fold increase in 5 years of house fires starting in
plastic consumer units,

That's a rather dramatic increase and begs the question Why?

I can't imagine that the ordinary domestic load profile has changed
that much, at least not to the point of overloading. So that leaves:

A change in the plastics used to ones that melt/burn at lower temps.
A reduction in the average sparkies abilty to tighten screws
properly.
A change in the fire reporting that indicates an increase but there
hasn't really been one.

I go for the third ATM.

--
Cheers
Dave.

wrote in message
...
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.

I've always felt those modern floppy plastic things were no patch over
a proper thermosetting Wylex box and was amazed they were considered
compliant.

They did have wooden bases, or have you forgotten?

The problem with the metal clad stuff was it rusted, the paint is often so
poor.
I wonder if it'll have to be galvanised?
I have metal ones, gave them a light spray of WD 40, seem to presreve them.

Does this mean that TT installations will again need an RCD before
the CU?

No.
(They never did, although that was the cheapest option before having a
single RCD protecting all circuits was explicitly called out as non-
conforming.)

Thanks but I am not clear that addresses the point I had in mind. The
ESC Q&A on this:

Question
"Is an RCD main switch (such as a 100 mA time-delayed device) still
required in the consumer unit of a new domestic installation forming
part of a TT system?"

Answer
"For a domestic installation complying with the 17th Edition where all
the final circuits are RCD-protected, an RCD main switch is no longer
required, provided that the consumer unit is of all insulated
construction."

I wondered if the new fireproof CUs were likely in practice to be "all
insulated
construction".

--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

On 2014-12-12, harryagain wrote:


wrote in message
...
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.

I've always felt those modern floppy plastic things were no patch over
a proper thermosetting Wylex box and was amazed they were considered
compliant.

They did have wooden bases, or have you forgotten?

The problem with the metal clad stuff was it rusted, the paint is often so
poor.
I wonder if it'll have to be galvanised?
I have metal ones, gave them a light spray of WD 40, seem to presreve them.

Don't spray the inside while it's on. ;-)

In article ,
Lee wrote:
Surprised it's taken this long and personally I have always thought that
having the mains incommer, switchgear and commonly the gas as well,
under the stairs is just stupid.

Why? Generally there so they don't ruin the look of a public part of the
house.

Maybe one of the ways to "punish" the excessive profits of the energy
companies would be to require them to relocate the supplies to the
outside wall - of course they'd never agree to it

Personally, I think those outdoor cabinets look hideous. And why would you
want to go outdoors to re-set a breaker, etc?

--
*I'm planning to be spontaneous tomorrow *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Friday, 12 December 2014 11:17:16 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,

Personally, I think those outdoor cabinets look hideous. And why would you
want to go outdoors to re-set a breaker, etc?

The star I've seen some of the boxes I'm suprised they're safe.
I wouldn't want to reset a RCB or anyhting electrical outside in the rain.

LFB report in 2011 suggested main cause was poor connections to neutral
busbars. See
http://www.electricalsafetyfirst.org...ched-On-25.pdf

Included:

"While the main cause of fire within plastic consumer unit enclosures
is without doubt poor workmanship, the materials used in the
manufacture of such enclosures and possibly the type and
arrangement of the components are other factors that can't be
ignored. The increase in the number of terminations having only one
securing screw and an almost unanimous adoption of 'cage clamp'
type terminations are arguably a backward step in equipment design,
irrespective of whether they comply with current product standards."

and

"Five common brands of consumer unit were selected for the first
stage of the investigation. Initial tests showed that only two of the
five brands included flame retardant in the plastic enclosure material,
although there is no requirement in the applicable product standards
to do so."





--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

On 12/12/2014 11:56, whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 12 December 2014 11:17:16 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,

Personally, I think those outdoor cabinets look hideous. And why would you
want to go outdoors to re-set a breaker, etc?

The star I've seen some of the boxes I'm suprised they're safe.
I wouldn't want to reset a RCB or anyhting electrical outside in the rain.


Are you sure that you'd have to? I thought that these external boxes
housed the meter to enable it to be read from outside, but surely the CU
is on the inside? Mine certainly was in my previous house which had an
external meter box.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On 12/12/2014 09:10, Brian Gaff wrote:
Its very funny, cos my old original 1939 one with wire fuses was made of
metal with little bakalite covers for the fuses. Some plastics do not burn
but do melt and give off nasty fumes as they do so. I always thought it was
a bad idea to use anything that can be toxic.
Brian


I think you mean don't burn by themselves as all the common plastics
will burn if you supply heat (from a bad joint for instance).

Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 00:17:42 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

This follows a five fold increase in 5 years of house fires starting in
plastic consumer units,

That's a rather dramatic increase and begs the question Why?

I can't imagine that the ordinary domestic load profile has changed
that much, at least not to the point of overloading. So that leaves:

A change in the plastics used to ones that melt/burn at lower temps.
A reduction in the average sparkies abilty to tighten screws
properly.
A change in the fire reporting that indicates an increase but there
hasn't really been one.

I go for the third ATM.

Another possibility may be lack of flexibility in newer 25mm tails combined
with new cage clamps instead of tunnel clamps which means that slight
movement of a tail may loosen the clamp.

Why are the tails moved about? Meter changes?

I wonder if the fire investigations listed the tail sizes and type of clamp.
And whether they were able to identify the exact source of the overheating.

Maybe more flexible tails are an answer.

Metal boxes are just about containment not about prevention.

If TT installations will need a leading RCD I suppose that will need to be
in a metal box too and ........

It seems to me that the regulations are being changed before the situation
is fully understood.

Edgar

harryagain wrote:

wrote in message
...
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.

I've always felt those modern floppy plastic things were no patch over
a proper thermosetting Wylex box and was amazed they were considered
compliant.

They did have wooden bases, or have you forgotten?

The problem with the metal clad stuff was it rusted, the paint is often so
poor.
I wonder if it'll have to be galvanised?
I have metal ones, gave them a light spray of WD 40, seem to presreve them.

I have three Contactum CUs (bought in the last two or three years from
TLC), they're in a boat so quite damp conditions. They all look
perfect so far. ... oh, they're painted metal ones, that was the point!

--
Chris Green
·

Edgar Iredale wrote:

I wonder if the fire investigations listed the tail sizes and type of clamp.
And whether they were able to identify the exact source of the overheating.

Maybe more flexible tails are an answer.

Presumably the DIN-rail mounted main switch and RCD/MCB/MCBO will
continue to have plastic construction, surely they are in closer contact
with any faulty overheating connection?

Metal boxes are just about containment not about prevention.

May well count as prevention of a building fire to the fire service ...

In article ,
Roger Mills wrote:
Are you sure that you'd have to? I thought that these external boxes
housed the meter to enable it to be read from outside, but surely the CU
is on the inside? Mine certainly was in my previous house which had an
external meter box.

Even more reason not to have an external box, then. It's trivial to submit
the reading yourself these days anyway.

I've certainly seen newish houses where the CU is external to the house.

--
*He's not dead - he's electroencephalographically challenged

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Friday, December 12, 2014 12:38:18 PM UTC, Robin wrote:
"Five common brands of consumer unit were selected for the first
stage of the investigation. Initial tests showed that only two of the
five brands included flame retardant in the plastic enclosure material,
although there is no requirement in the applicable product standards
to do so."

I thought the existing Wiring Regulations required all connections / live parts to be in an incombustible enclosure?

Therefore the common brands of CU which are combustible are simply not fit for the purpose and are returnable to the retailer under Sale of Goods Act.

Owain

In article ,
"Robin" writes:
Does this mean that TT installations will again need an RCD before
the CU?

No.
(They never did, although that was the cheapest option before having a
single RCD protecting all circuits was explicitly called out as non-
conforming.)

Thanks but I am not clear that addresses the point I had in mind. The
ESC Q&A on this:

Question
"Is an RCD main switch (such as a 100 mA time-delayed device) still
required in the consumer unit of a new domestic installation forming
part of a TT system?"

Answer
"For a domestic installation complying with the 17th Edition where all
the final circuits are RCD-protected, an RCD main switch is no longer
required, provided that the consumer unit is of all insulated
construction."

I wondered if the new fireproof CUs were likely in practice to be "all
insulated
construction".

The other option for TT systems was to provide extra sturdy insulation
around the feed on entry and inside the CU before it becomes RCD-protected,
and kits were available to do this for some metalic cased CU's.

I don't know what Ammendment 3 will say on this topic.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article o.uk,
"Dave Liquorice" writes:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 00:17:42 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

This follows a five fold increase in 5 years of house fires starting in
plastic consumer units,

The rise in dirt-cheap CU's is something that's happened mainly
in the last 10 years, so I suspect the proportion of houses with
them has grown dramatically - both new houses and rewires.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On Friday, December 12, 2014 3:18:31 PM UTC, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
The rise in dirt-cheap CU's is something that's happened mainly
in the last 10 years, so I suspect the proportion of houses with
them has grown dramatically - both new houses and rewires.

And, of course, Part P of the building regulations and the '5 week wonders' with a 'Part P qualification'

Owain

On 12/12/2014 10:28, harryagain wrote:
wrote in message
...
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.

I've always felt those modern floppy plastic things were no patch over
a proper thermosetting Wylex box and was amazed they were considered
compliant.

They did have wooden bases, or have you forgotten?

The problem with the metal clad stuff was it rusted, the paint is often so
poor.
I wonder if it'll have to be galvanised?
I have metal ones, gave them a light spray of WD 40, seem to presreve them.

I had nothing else but painted metal enclosures in my factories, from
the distribution board to individual isolating switch fuses. Over
several decades, they managed to survive an industrial environment very
well without needing any maintenance to the cases.

--
Colin Bignell

On 12/12/2014 11:15, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Lee wrote:
Surprised it's taken this long and personally I have always thought that
having the mains incommer, switchgear and commonly the gas as well,
under the stairs is just stupid.

Why? Generally there so they don't ruin the look of a public part of the
house.


Simply because having the *potential* of a ignition source under the (in
most cases flammable) only escape route is stupid.
It's just fortunate that such fires are thankfully rare.

Equally I don't like the 30's semis that have the cooker directly under
the stairs, either.

On 12/12/14 00:17, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
A heads-up that Amendment 3 to the wiring regs (due in January) will require
home consumer units to be made of a non-combustable material (i.e. metal),
or to be enclosed in a non-combustable enclosure. This follows a five fold
increase in 5 years of house fires starting in plastic consumer units,
often under the stairs, which are usually the only escape route. This
applies to any other switchgear too, not just the CU.

The new requirement will be delayed until January 2016, to allow
manufacturers time to produce metal consumer units in sufficient numbers.

Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.


Makes me feel glad I chose a metal Hager.

But the more pertinent question is:

Why 5x in the last 5 years?

Poor quality devices? Terminals?

The damn things should not be getting hot on a regular basis in the
first place.

Andrew Gabriel wrote


A heads-up that Amendment 3 to the wiring regs (due in January) will require
home consumer units to be made of a non-combustable material (i.e. metal),
or to be enclosed in a non-combustable enclosure. This follows a five fold
increase in 5 years of house fires starting in plastic consumer units,
often under the stairs, which are usually the only escape route. This
applies to any other switchgear too, not just the CU.

The new requirement will be delayed until January 2016, to allow
manufacturers time to produce metal consumer units in sufficient numbers.

Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.


I had my lecci meter changed today. The electrician had come from a
house where he he'd refused to change the meter. He'd looked at the
circuits connected to it and discovered the T&E were lead sheathed. It
appeared much of the house was the same.

In article sting.com,
Sailor wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote


A heads-up that Amendment 3 to the wiring regs (due in January) will require
home consumer units to be made of a non-combustable material (i.e. metal),
or to be enclosed in a non-combustable enclosure. This follows a five fold
increase in 5 years of house fires starting in plastic consumer units,
often under the stairs, which are usually the only escape route. This
applies to any other switchgear too, not just the CU.

The new requirement will be delayed until January 2016, to allow
manufacturers time to produce metal consumer units in sufficient numbers.

Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.


I had my lecci meter changed today. The electrician had come from a
house where he he'd refused to change the meter. He'd looked at the
circuits connected to it and discovered the T&E were lead sheathed. It
appeared much of the house was the same.

When we moved into this house (1977) there was still some lead sheathed
lighting cabling. The insulation had statrted to go, since the outer was
live!

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

"Adam Funk" wrote in message
...
On 2014-12-12, harryagain wrote:


wrote in message
...
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were
a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced
CU's
over the last ~15 years.

I've always felt those modern floppy plastic things were no patch over
a proper thermosetting Wylex box and was amazed they were considered
compliant.

They did have wooden bases, or have you forgotten?

The problem with the metal clad stuff was it rusted, the paint is often
so
poor.
I wonder if it'll have to be galvanised?
I have metal ones, gave them a light spray of WD 40, seem to presreve
them.

Don't spray the inside while it's on. ;-)

Why not? It's recommended for electrical contacts.

"Sailor" wrote in message
ldhosting.com...
Andrew Gabriel wrote


A heads-up that Amendment 3 to the wiring regs (due in January) will
require
home consumer units to be made of a non-combustable material (i.e.
metal),
or to be enclosed in a non-combustable enclosure. This follows a five
fold
increase in 5 years of house fires starting in plastic consumer units,
often under the stairs, which are usually the only escape route. This
applies to any other switchgear too, not just the CU.

The new requirement will be delayed until January 2016, to allow
manufacturers time to produce metal consumer units in sufficient numbers.

Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.


I had my lecci meter changed today. The electrician had come from a
house where he he'd refused to change the meter. He'd looked at the
circuits connected to it and discovered the T&E were lead sheathed. It
appeared much of the house was the same.


Lead shielded cable has/had no earth wire.
So obviously didn't knowwhat he was talking about.
And might conceivably have been servicable.

On 12/12/14 10:15, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 00:17:42 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

This follows a five fold increase in 5 years of house fires starting in
plastic consumer units,

That's a rather dramatic increase and begs the question Why?

I can't imagine that the ordinary domestic load profile has changed
that much, at least not to the point of overloading. So that leaves:

A change in the plastics used to ones that melt/burn at lower temps.
A reduction in the average sparkies abilty to tighten screws
properly.
A change in the fire reporting that indicates an increase but there
hasn't really been one.

I go for the third ATM.


Or a drop in the quality of the terminals.

There is a thread on the IET forums about this - a lot of folk are
citing poor terminal quality (dissimilar metals and poorly constructed
cage clamps that make it too easy to get the wire or busbar prong the
wrong side of the cage).

I am less than happy with the quality of many accessories. You get
screws where the earth in a bit of 2.5mm2 disappears up the side of the
screw no matter how you arrange it. Or weak and flimsy terminals.

I've had heaters and extension leads where the moulded plug runs hot
under full load (hot not warm) - a problem which seems to miraculously
go away when I rip the plug off and replace with a nice solid MK one.

I have only had one socket do that (all GET plastic sockets here, new 3
years ago) - and that had been abused because someone failed to plug a
heater in properly with the plug half out).

So to me it suggests that there's too much crap entering the market.
Other than gratuitously poor installation or extreme abuse or
exceptional failure, no switching device or accessory should be getting
hot let alone catching fire.

Whilst I don't think thermoplastic CUs are a great idea, they are
solving the wrong problem.

Higher product standards and random sample testing on an ongoing basis
is what's needed.

harryagain wrote:
"Adam Funk" wrote in message
...
On 2014-12-12, harryagain wrote:


wrote in message
...
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were
a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced
CU's
over the last ~15 years.

I've always felt those modern floppy plastic things were no patch over
a proper thermosetting Wylex box and was amazed they were considered
compliant.

They did have wooden bases, or have you forgotten?

The problem with the metal clad stuff was it rusted, the paint is often
so
poor.
I wonder if it'll have to be galvanised?
I have metal ones, gave them a light spray of WD 40, seem to presreve
them.

Don't spray the inside while it's on. ;-)

Why not? It's recommended for electrical contacts.


The propellant is flamable.

F Murtz wrote:

harryagain wrote:

Adam Funk wrote:

Don't spray the inside while it's on. ;-)

Why not? It's recommended for electrical contacts.

The propellant is flamable.

The product is, but the propellant is actually CO2.

In message , charles
writes
In article sting.com,
Sailor wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote


A heads-up that Amendment 3 to the wiring regs (due in January)
will require
home consumer units to be made of a non-combustable material (i.e. metal),
or to be enclosed in a non-combustable enclosure. This follows a five fold
increase in 5 years of house fires starting in plastic consumer units,
often under the stairs, which are usually the only escape route. This
applies to any other switchgear too, not just the CU.

The new requirement will be delayed until January 2016, to allow
manufacturers time to produce metal consumer units in sufficient numbers.

Pleased to say I always throught the thermosoftening plastic CU's were a
liability and I have fitted commercial metal ones when I've replaced CU's
over the last ~15 years.


I had my lecci meter changed today. The electrician had come from a
house where he he'd refused to change the meter. He'd looked at the
circuits connected to it and discovered the T&E were lead sheathed. It
appeared much of the house was the same.

When we moved into this house (1977) there was still some lead sheathed
lighting cabling. The insulation had statrted to go, since the outer was
live!


In our old house we had one length of lead sheathed cable IIRC under the
floor.. Removed when I rewired the kitchen IIRC. It was ok, but the
rubber insulation would have been dodgy once moved.

More worrying was the lighting wiring. It still had the original 1930's
wiring - rubber sheathed singles in narrow metal conduit. In the loft I
found choc blocks where more modern additions had been made. The choc
blocks where not in nay enclosure, or even wrapped in tape. In one the
cable had become loose, and I found it happily sparking away. Felt quite
lucky not to have had a fire.
--
Chris French

On 12/12/2014 09:59, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 08:18:19 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:

Is it retrospective, i.e. will everyone with a plastic CU have to get
it changed immediately or within a limited time period, or is it only
for CU's in new-builds or when one is changed during a house refurb?

Very rarely is any change in any regulation retrospective. It raises
the "who pays" spectre and no one want's to (or has the money).

I'd be very surprised it applied to anything other than new build or
replacement.

It will give surveyors and electricians another thing to put in their
survey reports though.

I wouldn't be surprised if has quite a rapid impact, because
electricians seem quite keen in my experience to replace CUs with ones
conforming to the latest standards.

On 13/12/2014 09:23, Andy Burns wrote:
F Murtz wrote:

harryagain wrote:

Adam Funk wrote:

Don't spray the inside while it's on. ;-)

Why not? It's recommended for electrical contacts.

The propellant is flamable.

The product is, but the propellant is actually CO2.


Hadn't used to be. I left a car at Heysham docks for week when I went to
MGP. It was subjected to a gale and parked facing into it. Took a 1 mile
tow to get it going, badly. I popped the bonnet, mate jumped out,
sprayed WD40 on the external sparks. It lit up very well. I got a really
good look at his startled face though the gap between scuttle and bonnet.

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
But the more pertinent question is:

Why 5x in the last 5 years?

Poor quality devices? Terminals?

The damn things should not be getting hot on a regular basis in the
first place.

Quite. Of course, if an installer doesn't tighten things properly it might
well give problems down the line when the terminals start to oxidise
slightly. I've seen a lot of that with sockets.

--
*Why is it called tourist season if we can't shoot at them?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.