How will electrical regulations be applied?

[Penners]

A friend asked me an interesting question, yesterday, which I was unable to answer. Anyone got a view, please?

About 3 years ago he got planning and building regs consent to carry out some major alterations to his house. He got his consent some 6 months before the latest electrical regulations came into force.

He's been doing the work himself, a bit at a time, with friends helping from time to time. (Including me - a bit!)

He will probably finish the work by the end of this year, at which time he'll want to get the BCO in to finally sign off the job.

In some of the rooms that he has altered, he did the electrical wiring himself. And the location of the electrical sockets doesn't comply the latest height requirements (ie: they're below 450mm from the floor).

As the chap got his consent before the latest regs came in, will the BCO overlook the fact that the sockets are too low, or is he likely to object? The drawings that were submitted with his building regs application made no mention of the socket heights, and they received consent.

Bottom line: are building regs applied on the basis of how they stood at the time of consent, or how they stand at the time of final inspection?

Can anyone answer this one, please?

 

[Alastair]

Just ring the BCO. Various offices have slightly differing views, and your friend's can tell him what they expect. Most BCO guy's don't find the rules any more amenable than the rest of us, but they are as helpful as they can be until wool gets pulled.

 

[bower1]

As far as I have been informed, the height of the sockets is not relevant for an extension, just a new house. I know there is some disagreement with this, but I have just had the wiring of an extension I did signed off, and I was told the socket heights were not an issue.

He will probably find that the BCO will not sign off the wiring, but will want to see a certificate from an electrician who is qualified/insured to do inspection work.

I was lead to believe that no electricians would do this, but the first one I phoned did, and cost about £300 including fitting a new fuse box.

 

[Penners]

Many thanks for those replies.

It all seems a bit down to the colour of your eyes and the direction of the wind. Does anyone know whether there is a definitive policy in this matter?

 

[Gervase]

I've found that work started before the new Part L regs came into force doesn't have to comply (and have had that assurance from Building Control), so I imagine works under Part P would be the same.

 

[Anita]

We have had the same reply as Gervase from our BCO with regard to our rather long-term byre/workshop renovation - as it was started before the regualtions changed!

 

[Penners]

I shall pass those comments on to my pal, who'll be a happy man!

Many thanks.

 

[Cloudscape]

An electrician has started to rewire my house The current wiring seems to be spurs off spurs off spurs.

I didn't realize that regulations would be a factor. He's placing the sockets high and switches low, as he would in a new build.

Does he have to do this?

Are the socket and switch positions determined as suitable heights for wheelchair users?

I know electricity isn't exactly 'period', and sockets are just sockets, but something irks me about sockets half a metre from the floor.

 

[Flyfisher]

Just to add to the question in a similar vein, I've been told by an electrician that the latest regs also define minimum numbers of sockets for different types of rooms. Is this true and, if so, does it apply when re-wiring an existing property?

I'll need to re-wire at some point but I'm happy with the limited number of sockets in many of our rooms and don't want to have to hack the walls and floors about just to install some additional sockets I don't think I need. I'm concerned I could rewire everything to a perfectly safe electrical condition but fail certification by not having adequate numbers of sockets - or indeed, like the original question, have them mounted too low (i.e. in their existing positions).

 

[skier-hughes]

Tell 'em you only installed that number to save the world, no sockets, no electricity used, no emmissions then see what they have to say :lol:

 

[Penners]

not having adequate numbers of sockets - or indeed, like the original question, have them mounted too low (i.e. in their existing positions).

Surely building regs can't be applied retroactively to details of the building that already exist, can they?

 

[Flyfisher]

I tend to agree, but I'm not sure if the electrician was referring to building regs or wiring regs. I would guess that wiring regs wouldn't be concerned with numbers of sockets etc, only that they were installed and wired safely. But logic and hope only goes so far when it comes to all these regulations.

The electrician also said that things were somewhat vague when it comes to doing new work on an old installation (like ours!). In principle, only the new work need comply to the latest regs but consideration of the state of the existing system must be taken into account in case it compromises the new system. Eg, a new consumer unit with modern MCBs and RCCDs could not be fitted to, say, rubber wiring (not an issue in our case but an example the electrician gave). But he admitted things were not entirely clear, but that could just mean it's not clear to him, hence my question.

On the point about minimum numbers of sockets, he said that this was to discourage the use of plug-in multiway socket strips. However, when I asked how, if properly fused, these socket strips could compromise the safety of the installation he conceded that they couldn't! I have about 12 plugs in my study connected to a single wall outlet via 3 socket strips, but I don't see how that can be dangerous unless I overload the wall socket - which I can't because of the fuses in the socket strips.

 

[Johneds]

I hope this is definitive. The minimum height of sockets is prescribed by Part M - disabled regulations, not Part P.

Part M does not apply to existing dwellings or extensions. It only applies to new dwellings.

 

[Lime]

I think you will find that many electricians are confused about this sort of thing too, particularly as the new 17th electrical regs are applicable come July which change some previous "accepted" methods, but also by the building regulation part P and it's varied interpretation.

The building regulations are always applied from when the contract/agreement to carry out the work was made or the job started in the case of DIY.
The height of sockets and switches applies to new build only, not to rewiring or extensions of it.

If having electrical work carried out in your home it would make a lot of sense to have it conforming to the new 17th edition IET (IEE) regulations.

 

[Penners]

The minimum height of sockets is prescribed by Part M - disabled regulations, not Part P.

Part M does not apply to existing dwellings or extensions. It only applies to new dwellings.

That's very useful to know. Thanks, John.

 

[middi]

I was presented with this exact scenario when I had to rewire the old house and the " new" living accomodation and kitchen extension.

The electrician pointed out the new regs to me after I had already run all the rings into position of switches and plugs. After calling him a few unfriendly names under my breath I called the BCO and asked him. He categorically assured me that the new height regulations did not apply to old buildings or attached extensions, it is a regulation that only applies to new build especially new estates ( I could have kissed him ).

I think it is a bit like phasing out 4 star petrol, only the new cars had to be built to run on unleaded, as the old cars faded away no more 4 star was available.

There is no other alternative but to ask the BCO first for the "wink" or the "nod" before steaming ahead with the positioning of these. As the years go by after these new regulations there is no telling when a BCO will insists on these being applied everytime you want to change a light bulb or put the kettle on , provided that he/she is willing to enter the property in the first place without a wheelchair access and six feet thick insulation.

If you get asked why you need fifty light bulb holders in each room, just say you need to see where you are going in the dark because of the poor light emitted from those "new" energy saving bulbs.

 

[arthurw3]

Talking of the poor light given out by energy saving bulbs, you can now get energy saving bulbs with a power of up to 85 Watt, which are equivalent to 430 watts of old lamp. See http://www.bltdirect.com/product.php?pid=8306&cat=48&nm=An+Energy+Saving+Spiral+85+watt+ES

 

[FamilyWiggs]

Yes Arthur, and if you switch it on now you should just be able to see something with it by Christmas. :evil:

 

[Lime]

Yes Arthur, and if you switch it on now you should just be able to see something with it by Christmas. :evil:

:lol:

Your post makes a serious point.

Most people have central heated modern houses that are often very warm and the "eco" light they buy to save the world and life as we know it is warm too, heated by all the excess heat energy they waste.

I bet many of the people on this forum have some rooms that are cold most of the time (no waste of energy) and the "eco" lights take longer to warm up and give out light than it does to have breakfast.

 

[Penners]

Most people have central heated modern houses that are often very warm and the "eco" light they buy to save the world and life as we know it is warm too, heated by all the excess heat energy they waste.

Yes, low energy lighting produces some heat, albeit less than the old incandescent lighting. But it's a moot point whether that heat is wasted (in winter, anyway).

As you say, most people have central heating, which is controlled by a thermostat. If the lighting is giving off heat, then it will presumably help to satisfy the thermostat just that little bit quicker. So the heat won't, in fact, be wasted.