Electrical certificate

[88v8]

We inherited a certificate with the house. Our insurers, who set great store by bits of paper, have reminded me that it expires next month.
Speaking yesterday to an electrician recommended by a neighbour with an old house, I mentioned that we have surface wiring and porcelain switches on wooden pattresses. I could hear him sucking his teeth. He started mumbling about the 'current regs'.

When I speak of a 'certificate', am I asking for the wrong thing? I don't care a hoot about the current regs. When I take our 1970 car for MOT it's tested against the regs in force when it was built, no one insists that it be fitted with airbags and ABS. And when we visit National Trust properties I see plenty of original light switches on wooden pattresses. And porcelain ceiling roses on pattresses as well.

So, what should I be asking for in the way of a 'certificate' that doesn't involve the current regs?

Ivor

PS current... hahaha...

 

[a twig]

Unless you are renting the house out, why do you need a certificate? I'm confused...

What you are probably after is a Periodic Inspection Report (PIR) which basically just tests that the wiring is still safe etc.

http://www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk/find-an-electrician/periodic-inspection-explained/

You may well find yourself having to replace some bits of wiring however I'm afraid...

EDITED once I think I understood the question better.

 

[Lime]

I'd change my insurance company.

 

[Andys]

Even if the insurance documents don't explicitly require a current electrical certificate, not to have one might appear risky especially with an old installation.
We've been through the same thing, our insurers require an electrical safety certificate and our 10 years had expired so we had to have the testing done.

Our electrician did an automated test at each light-socket and announced all our brass light fittings would have to go. After some questioning, him phoning a friend etc, we established that what was probably needed was replacement of the brass bayonet fittings with identical new ones and ensuring each brass fitting had a secure earth wire. We did the refurbishment and then he came back to re-test. We had the distribution board replaced which I guess kept him sympathetic.

If you have ancient dolly switches etc then an electrician will go for those like a rat up a drainpipe, which would be a shame and it may be worth trying to find some way to keep them. One way could be to use them to switch a low-voltage, eg have the dolly switches controlling a relay box situated elsewhere. I've read of this being done in historic houses where the light switches are themselves historic. Annoyingly I can't find where I read it now.

It's worth looking into bathroom electrical zones because the chances are the bathroom light isn't acceptable any more. We converted one of our bathroom lights to low-voltage LED with a power supply in the loft space to get round this particular nuisance.

Old rubber-insulated cables are Game Over, according to the electrician we had. They cause great anxiety as the insulation can crumble away to the touch, leaving bare conductors - these are the road to a total re-wire:-/

This article's 11 years old so in terms of wiring regulations, outdated but it might be a starting point for further research.
http://www.buildingconservation.com/articles/wires/wires.htm

Andy

 

[Flyfisher]

I'm not sure what the regulations have to say but my feeling is that the safety of old installations can be significantly improved by the installation of a modern consumer unit alone. We had various fuseboxes, one of which was of the porcelain and wooden box variety, which looked wonderfully 'period' but are really no match - in safety terms - for modern RCBOs and other safety devices.

We have a many old 'toggle' light switches mounted behind circular, domed, screw-on brass covers, which can be easily unscrewed by hand (no tools needed) to expose the mains wiring inside. I'm sure these would not meet current regulations but our electrician was quite happy to certify our wiring on the basis that they were part of an existing installation. Perhaps he would have been less happy if the consumer units did not have up to date RCD devices protecting all circuits, which should protect against the potential shock hazard of older fixtures and fittings.

Modern CUs are not a panacea however, and we used to experience regular 'nuisance tripping' during heavy rainfall before the roof was fixed, but at least the tripping was an indication of a problem somewhere, which was not revealed when we had the old wired fuses.

Likewise, rubber wiring in steel conduit. Fortunately we had very little of this but there was one section under some damp and rotten floorboards where walking barefoot would result in a definite 'tingle'. When the modern CU was installed, that particular circuit would regularly trip when walked upon and it turned out to be the result of perished rubber wiring inside steel conduit flexing under the rotten floorboards, causing the conduit to become live but not blowing the fuse because of a failed earth connection to the conduit! Of course, the modern RCD easily detected the problem and tripped. A nuisance, yes, but far safer than the alternative!

 

[Lime]

I'm not sure what the regulations have to say but my feeling is that the safety of old installations can be significantly improved by the installation of a modern consumer unit alone. We had various fuseboxes, one of which was of the porcelain and wooden box variety, which looked wonderfully 'period' but are really no match - in safety terms - for modern RCBOs and other safety devices.

If you have an insulated (plastic) consumer unit fitted you may be in for a shock.
They are not to be installed after January 1st because they pose a fire risk.
On your next certificate they will be marked down as either dangerous (if your electrician is of that mind) or "in need of improvement" i.e. needs changing.
The whole thing is a shambles.

See the IET link:-

http://www.theiet.org/forums/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=205&threadid=63611&enterthread=y

 

[Andys]

If you have an insulated (plastic) consumer unit fitted you may be in for a shock.

Pun intended I hope
Haven't we been round the whole metal / plastic thing before?
It sounds like the 'you need a fireproof backing board' nagging I managed to ignore when I moved into my first house in the 1990s - that seems to have gone away now.
I couldn't talk to the electrician for very long before frustration mounted and we all had to go and have a quiet sit down at opposite ends of the house:-0

 

[Flyfisher]

If you have an insulated (plastic) consumer unit fitted you may be in for a shock.
They are not to be installed after January 1st because they pose a fire risk.

Yes, I've read about the forthcoming changes, but I don't believe the new regulations are intended to be implemented retrospectively. That way lies madness, though I can quite imagine less scrupulous electricians using it as an excuse to do unnecessary work. Fortunately, I found a sensible and pragmatic electrician. However, even he bemoaned the increasingly frequent changes to regulations and told me this is one of the reasons he decided not to take on an apprentice because of the cost of sending them on regular courses.

You're right, the whole thing is a shambles, but that seems to be the way of the world these days, in which no one can be trusted to do anything unless they have a drawer full of certificates to 'prove' they can.

 

[Lime]

If you have an insulated (plastic) consumer unit fitted you may be in for a shock.

Pun intended I hope
Haven't we been round the whole metal / plastic thing before?
It sounds like the 'you need a fireproof backing board' nagging I managed to ignore when I moved into my first house in the 1990s - that seems to have gone away now.
I couldn't talk to the electrician for very long before frustration mounted and we all had to go and have a quiet sit down at opposite ends of the house:-0

Pun intended indeed, particularly when some of the metal replacements in the years to come become live because of an earthing fault.
(and it will happen if my experience with older metal-cased fuseboxes is anything to go by)

I started replacing fuseboxes, as they were know back in the early 1960s, professionally with the then-modern well designed hard plastic and wooden sided Wylex boxes.
Compared to what they replaced they were space-age, you could even get cartridge fuses and MCBs for them too.
They are still safe to use if wired correctly, not overloaded and in good order.
Then they were superseded by the metal or plastic consumer versions of the same design slowly morphing into what we now know as a consumer unit.

Of course the metal boxes posed a serious threat to the cables if satisfactory grommets were not used in the entry and exit holes together with an added danger, compared to plastic, of the case becoming live if the main earth was compromised in some way.
I rarely used them except in areas where a plastic box was likely to be damaged.

The modern consumer unit is an example of what happens when accountants dictate the quality of build in a specialised unit.
So much so that at some time in their development some bright spark thought it would make economic sense to take out the fire retardant additive to the plastic case.
Now London Fire Brigade (LFB) have created such a stink about them catching fire and burning houses down that they have forced the regulations to be changed.
The (soft) plastic insulated consumer units installed over the last 30 years are now considered to be dangerous.
The chief reason they are dangerous is because the single screw terminations in them are or become loose, either from when installed or because the cables have been moved/disturbed.
The plastic MCBs, RCBOs or RCDs (still called fuses by some) overheat, burn and set fire to the plastic casing.
The casings burn (varies between manufacturer, some very vigorously) giving off huge quantities of very poisonous fumes and dripping molten, flaming plastic setting fire to whatever is below them and flaring up to set light to the ceiling too.

In comparison the old Wylex hard plastic and wood fuseboxes are extremely difficult to burn even on a bonfire (I know I've tried) easily making a half-hour fire check and probably a lot longer.

The new metal cased consumer units will have all the problems of older metal fuseboxes with the added problem that the internal parts will be much the same as before with the high probability of overheating and fire risk.
Perhaps what is even more unbelievable and disgraceful is the fact that the industry has know about this problem for over a year and yet has been allowed to fit the dangerous plastic units in order to use up the old stock in wholesalers and manufacturers.
In the last few months they have almost been giving them away.

 

[88v8]

Mmmm
PO had the 'dangerous' wired fusebox replaced by RCDs in 2010. It's on a wooden backing board in a wooden cupboard.
Thinks*** Wasn't Clandon a fusebox fire??? That would be one in the eye for the Trade and its wonderful 'Regulations'.

We do have dolly switches, and power sockets and dolly switches on oak & elm pattresses. As we did in our previous house for 31 years.
Fortunately the wiring here is pvc. Agree that the old rubber wiring is just a fire wating to happen.

What I find unforgivable is the wiring in our attic; that was installed in 1993/4, presumably by a 'professional'. It looks as if he stood in the loft hatch and flung the wiring across the loft. Nothing clipped, nothing in trunking. Given that the loft is thatched, and a stately home for mice, I think it should all be in metal conduit with metal boxes and eventually I shall get that done. Fortunately, the mice have so far preferred the pipe lagging.
That dubious (but functional) wiring must have gone through several inspections without comment.

Our dolly switches are mostly earthed. I had thought of putting a sheet of mylar between them and the pattress to improve, well, something. I'll be putting in more dollys when I get round to it. I have a goodly collection, including some lovely pie-crusts.

I hope we'll find a decent sparks who doesn't regard the certification as a job creation scheme. If he throws up legitimate issues, I'll deal with them, but as I get older I become less and less tolerant of rules and regulations, and if push comes to shove we don't have to have a certificate, for the simple reason that we don't have to have insurance.

Ivor

 

[Flyfisher]

The modern consumer unit is an example of what happens when accountants dictate the quality of build in a specialised unit.
So much so that at some time in their development some bright spark thought it would make economic sense to take out the fire retardant additive to the plastic case.
Now London Fire Brigade (LFB) have created such a stink about them catching fire and burning houses down that they have forced the regulations to be changed.

If CU fires are such a risk, surely it would not be too difficult to fit them with heat/smoke detectors that trip all power in the event of such an occurrence? Self-extinguishing materials are commonplace enough that tripping the power should remove the hazard. A molten CU might make a mess but it's better than coming home to a pile of smouldering ashes.

But I'm no expert and am sure the powers that be have considered all such options to ensure our safety.

 

[Lime]

........ am sure the powers that be have considered all such options to ensure our safety.

Are you really?
There are devices as you suggest but each is prone to either failure or inappropriate operation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AaKOx5q1j4

 

[Flyfisher]

I may have forgotten to include a suitable smiley :wink:

I'm astonished that CU units are not flame retardant already. I forget the precise details these days but I remember having to specify electronic enclosures and PC boards to a UL flammability rating of 94V-0 as part of product safety certification requirements and that was decades ago!

Some interesting reading here for those with nothing better to do: http://www.theiet.org/Forums/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=205&threadid=63709

 

[Lime]

Yes I've been following the prolonged discussions on CU fires on the IET website for at least a year.
In the beginning I made several comments but after umpteen threads about it the discussions have become jaded and repetitious.
There has been very little actual information provided by the London Fire Brigade about their claims or comment by the IET.
The CU tests in your link only test a handful of units and don't test with a loose connection either.
With all the hoo ha about it I'd expect the internet to be full of videos of CUs in flames, but it isn't.
There appears to be a cover up as to which manufacturers faired best and worst in fire.
The comments on your link do give a reasonable indication of how the trade feel about the change.
A large number blame the internal design of the CUs primarily and also, like myself, wonder who the hell decided to make the plastic cases so that they would burn freely by themselves?

 

[malcolm]

An electrical periodic inspection report shouldn't be too difficult surely. We've got one that says the place is OK despite some horrors that must have been there at the time. From my report it doesn't seem to be a difficult test - seems to be checking for earths and resistances mostly. No mention of my metal consumer unit which was out of fashion at the time. 88V8 - can send the report over to show what was involved if you message your email address.

I've found the best people to do the box ticking stuff are specialists not trades. Google periodic electrical inspection in your area. You will find a whole industry set up that will tick the box for you if you prefer to use your own common sense to stay safe.

 

[Zebra]

Periodic Inspection Reports are now called Electrical Installation Condition Reports. It's the same thing, just a lengthier form and a new name.
When a house is tested, the electrician goes through the ticklist, makes observations about anything he/she can find amiss, and gives each item either a tick, or a code C1 (immediate danger), C2 (potential danger), or C3 (not dangerous but doesn't comply with current regulations).
Whether or not it complies with the regulations which were in force when the thing was fitted is not considered. Few electricians are au fait with all the different versions of the regulations going back the last 50 years.
Other than in the case of obvious C1s, it may be a matter of opinion whether something poses a potential danger or not. I do find that things which one electrician would ignore, another would pick up. There may also be a certain amount of fudging that goes on, where one might not pick something up because they can't be bothered to fix it, or they do pick something up because they want the job of fixing it. Nobody is checking up! Unless the house burns down....
Code 1s are typically exposed conductive parts or dangerous overload. Code 2 covers an enormous range of conditions, including lighting circuits with no earth where there are metal faceplates and fittings, lack of main bonding, inadequate earthing of the installation, fittings not suitable for bathroom zones. Rubber cables would probably be a code 2 but any electrician would recommend changing them - they just fall apart in your hand.
Cables run higgledy-piggledy in the loft would be a code 2, as it means that the cable may become totally enclosed by thermal insulation, thereby reducing the current it can carry safely.
As for the issues Ivor mentions, surface wiring is not a problem if the cables are in good condition, securely fixed, and properly enclosed (double insulated cable like twin&earth, or enclosed in conduit). Porcelain switches are not necessarily a problem if they're in good condition, with any accessible conductive parts earthed. Wooden pattresses in my opinion would be a code 2, possibly a 3, as it means that the enclosure for live connections is not fire-rated. I like the idea of fitting fire-retardant plates behind them. There may be other inventive ways of making them comply.
There's an updated Best Practice Guide here explaining which items should be under which code, so you could question your electrician if you really wanted to piss them off! http://www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk/electrical-professionals/best-practice-guides/ - Guide 4 issue 4.

So the answer to your question is no, you can't get a certificate which doesn't involve the current regs.
However, suppose you could rectify any code 2s. You end up with a Condition Report full of code 3s which can still be assessed as "satisfactory." It doesn't make the installation illegal. The Wiring Regulations are not legally enforcable. There's no legal requirement even to have a Condition Report. What your insurance company would say to a report with a load of C3 observations is down to them. Another insurer might have a different policy. You could perhaps get your electrician, if they're on your side, to write a cover letter with the certificate explaining the outcome and their opinions. I'm sure I had a house insurance policy here without an electrical certificate at all.
Sometimes (for letting to the council, for example) a totally clean certificate is often asked for, which does force people to upgrade, which is ridiculous.
As for the plastic/metal consumer unit thing, it isn't applied retrospectively. That would have to be a code 3.
I love the idea of using a lower voltage at dolly switches. Bit of a faff though. And I love the idea of heat detectors in consumer units, why didn't they think of that!?

 

[Flyfisher]

Thanks for that. The report codes make sense given that no electrician can be expected to know 50+ years of different regulations but of course opens the door to a subjective opinion - of which I'm sure the vast majority of cases would be clear but that will always leave a few arguable ones. Not an easy situation really.

 

[Zebra]

I'm often surprised, given that there's one big book of rules, by the frequency with which one electrician has a discussion with another, along the lines of "You can't do that!" "Yes you can!"

 

[Flyfisher]

Perhaps there's a parallel universe where such things are not so confusing or contentious?

Or would that be about as likely as this:

 

[Lime]

I'm often surprised, given that there's one big book of rules, by the frequency with which one electrician has a discussion with another, along the lines of "You can't do that!" "Yes you can!"

Why are you surprised?
I'm not.
I've heard more nonsense said to me by other "electricians" than any other trade with the exception of the motor trade.
A large number seem incapable of understanding anything other than the simplest of circuit.
(Give them a fault and it soon sorts out the men from the boys or the women from the girls).
Many are just installers of relatively simple circuits that they have been taught or picked up from their mates and anything out of the ordinary frightens the pants off them.
If you frequent the IET forum you'll know what I mean.
I've lost count of the number of times a contributor has claimed that it is against the regulations to have a ring final circuit and a spur wired off the same MCB terminal.
I feel sorry for householders, I really do.