 | Home > Off Topic > one for the sparks and those familiar with the wiring regs.. |
 
|
|
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6298   
|
....I'm a bit rusty.
so to paint the scene. a mate of mine has just bought a flat to let and upon tenants moving in they reported the water heater wasn't working. I mate had, had a plumber in who replaced the immersion stat but suspected there might be an issue on the electrical side / the immersion itself. I called in and confirmed it was the immersion itself. armed with a new immersion we set about replacing it. the existing 'flex' was a plug and socket arrangement. the flex being made of 2 singles made of some king of heat resistant cord with cotton outer and the earth was simply a bit of copper with no insulation all into a 20A plug. I wasn't happy with this and knowing the flat had been rewired suggested the socket be replaced with a 20A DP switch and replaced the 'flex' with some proper 2.5mm high temp oil resistant 3 core flex. took the existing socket off and hey presto damaged rubber cables behind! we needed to get some hot water on so ran a new 2.5mm radial from consumer unit directly below to a 20A DP switch on 20A MBC. took cover off consumer unit and more rubber cables. water heater starts off in PVC and within a couple of meters changed to rubber. checked some sockets around the place and found no earth paths. no rcd's just mcbs. my mate was under the impression the whole place had been re-wired but upon inspection of the paper work only 2 new circuits have been installed and the consumer unit itself was replaced 7 years ago. to my mind the old unsafe circuits should not have been connected to the new consumer it. ie when the new consumer unit was installed all circuits should have been tested and should have met the standards / regulations of that time ie 17th edition. if you agree can you confirm which regulation would confirm this. should this not have been high lighted at the time of purchase / survey. any thoughts on where he may stand legally - he's now facing having to rewire the property which he hadn't bargained on at the time of purchase / negotiations.? many thanks for thoughts / comments. |
||
11th Nov 2018 12:54pm |
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6298
|
thanks very much Brendan for your comments and concerns which we're fully aware of but moving on from there I'm trying to understand if the previous works were in line with the regulations in force at the time or not and whether the property has effectively be sold on a false understanding.
I'm not disputing what you've said it's just that we are already aware of your comments and we're trying to better understand other elements of this scenario.  |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 1:19pm |
|
| Badger110 Member Since: 06 Feb 2018 Location: South hams Posts: 1039  
|
If a test was done on the circuits when the new board was put in and it passed, then although they may look old and needs replacing, it doesn’t have to be ( technically ).
However you have no idea what was done after the board was installed. The only sure way is to have a new inspection done and take advisories from there. |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 1:52pm |
|
| Rashers Member Since: 21 Jun 2015 Location: Norfolk Posts: 3500 
|
If a new consumer unit was fitted 7 years ago, all circuits emanating from it should have been tested and certified.
That’s nothing new to the 17th edition, that’s just how it’s been for years. In reality, it doesn’t happen. Electricians just change distribution boards, the owners / occupiers are no wiser and everyone is happy. If you are talking about rubber cable, I presume this is the old Vulcanised Indian rubber which goes from flexible to brittle dangerous as you watch it! I was taught using the 15th edition and as far as I know, VIRs were not a standard type of cable and hasn’t been since. So no real excuses there for not having been condemned. Also, VIR cable will be imperial sized cable so would be incredibly difficult to prove that any modern circuit protective device would be compliant as the IET 17th edition only covers metric sized cable. Saying that, I am afraid that the IET 17th edition is a bit of a pain and you won’t find a regulation which states that VIR cable should not be used. Not useful. It does state that all electrical work should be tested, inspected and certified, so there was no excuse for the DB change. If it was mine, I would isolate anything wired in VIR. It really is not nice. I have carried out test and inspection work where these cables were found and they were still pliable and as good as the day they went in, but I still don’t like them. I think your mate is looking at a re-wire. |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 1:52pm |
|
| leeds Member Since: 28 Dec 2009 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 8581
|
Well as a landlord with over 30 years experience my advice would be to the wiring checked out by a qualified electrician and carry out any remedial work immediately and hand over the management to a professional agent.
Your mate was under the 'impression' that it had been rewired! What was safe 7 years ago might not be safe now as things do deteriorate with time. It is very easy to get the impression of a property being rewired. Many years ago it was not unknown to enhance the electrical system by just replacing fuse board/sockets/switches etc. Now when buying the property your mate would have the choice of a full survey which would include electrics, structural, drains etc or the much cheaper valuation survey. Very much like buying a used vehicle go for a full AA/RAC/independent engineer survey or take the word of private seller. Yes Caveat emptor applies to property as well When I bought properties I either got my sparkie to test the system out or just went in with the intention to rewire, which on older properties often meant a replaster especially coupled if rewire was coupled with CH/bathroom/kitchen etc. One landlord in Leeds did prison time because a tenant got electrocuted in shower. Courts took a dim view of the landlord as he was also a qualified electrician. So for your mate to comply with his legal obligations it is a qualified electrician time and rewire time if qualified sparkie says so. If the property is a HMO then it will be 5 year retest on electrics. Brendan |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 2:31pm |
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6298
|
my questions have been partly answered above. when the db was installed all circuits should have been tested - they weren't.
granted who knows what may have happened in the meantime? without testing I don't know why there's no earth present at the socket outlets. there's no rcd on the shower so to my mind the consumer unit should not have been left as it was. my mate bought the property on the understanding the place had been rewired - clearly it hasn't (at least not properly). I'm not sure if this understanding was from a certificate the vendor gave him directly or via the purchase itself. do you think he has any recourse as clearly if he had know the place needed rewiring that would have played into what he offered - in fact he probably wouldn't have bought the place? |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 2:40pm |
|
| leeds Member Since: 28 Dec 2009 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 8581
|
1) What survey was carried out? If not a full structural survey then your mate has not tried to uncover all negative issues. If a full structural survey was carried out then there may be claim against the surveyors. 2) Deliberate misrepresentation or fraud? Unless the seller stated categorically that the property had been rewired and produced invoices/certificates to that effect then difficult to prove that. If seller was a fully qualified electrician then it might be possible to argue that the seller should have been aware of any electrical issues. Now the seller solicitor would have answer any questions prior to exchange of contract with comments such as 'to the best of our knowledge' or 'it is up to the buyer to check it out' So unless your mate can prove deliberate misrepresentation on the behalf of the seller and their agent that is not going anywhere. Legally it sounds like your mate has not carried out due diligence before purchase and has not carried out his legal obligations before letting the property. Brendan Brendan |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 3:45pm |
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6298
|
thanks that Brendan,
I don't know the exact terminology used so I'll have to have that conversation with him but I understand the vendor made it clear the place had been completely re-wired and was given certificates to back that up. he knows nothing about electrics. I've had a look at them and it states the consumer unit was replaced and the certificate only shows testing for 2 new circuits? I believe upon replacing the consumer unit the whole installation should have been tested - clearly it wasn't. what do you think? did the vendor deliberately mis-sell or do we think the blame largely falls with the electricians that replaced the consumer unit. and yes there is clearly some blame to be levelled at my mate for not undertaking a full survey at the time albeit given the above I can understand why not (he believed the paper not only to be in order but to back up what he was told). |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 4:05pm |
|
| leeds Member Since: 28 Dec 2009 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 8581
|
The important thing is what were the answers on the pre contract question forms.
If the vendors solicitor has done their job correctly then the answers would have been to the best of our knowledge/for the buyer to check out. Having sold rental properties which we had renovated, i.e. new electrics from the street, new roof, new CH, new kitchens and bathrooms etc which had been done to latest regulations and inspected by environmental health and met latest fire regulations etc with correct certificates for gas/electric/insulation etc we would answer the questions and add the caveat to the effect we believe the answers are correct but it is up to the buyer to check it out. Yes that was protecting my back just in case anything was wrong that I was not aware of. What your mates vendor said verbally is irrelevant about the wiring as he is not a qualified electrician. Now if the vendors solicitor guaranteed that the house had been fully rewired without any caveat about checking it for yourself, your mate might and I repeat might have a claim against the vendor. A claim against the sparkie who did the work? What were the instructions for the work to be carried out? There again the contract was between the sparkie and the vendor. Were the other circuits unsafe 7 years ago? Good luck with trying to prove that one. Basically your mate has not done due diligence on this purchase. It sounds like your mate is trying to pass the buck on his mistake. If he can not afford to have the property rewired should he be a landlord? Rental properties have a higher maintenance costs then privately owned. Also with rental property you get voids and missed rental payments which the landlord must cover. Your mate must fulfil his legal obligations to his tenants as he is responsible for the safety of his tenants. Part of that legal obligations is to have any electrical or gas work carried out by qualified tradespeople or at least certified by qualified tradespeople. Brendan |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 5:26pm |
|
| Badger110 Member Since: 06 Feb 2018 Location: South hams Posts: 1039
|
In all honesty, i makes no difference what anybody said. If the certificate shows the 2 new circuits were tested upon installation and were deemed to pass then that’s all you have to go by. If the CB was put in and no record of it being installed by anyone then you take it at face value If you had a receipt of the CB being put in and no certificate, different story altogether. Is the water and gas earth bonded btw? |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 5:35pm |
|
| Rashers Member Since: 21 Jun 2015 Location: Norfolk Posts: 3500
|
Unlike Gas, there is no register of qualified electricians in this country. This I believe is wrong, but I am not employed for my opinion
There are organisations like NAPIT and NICEIC who allegedly have members with certain standards. My experience of the latter after some appallingly shoddy work carried out by one it’s members was questionable. Part P qualification is a farce. Part P is a part of the building regulations and was introduced after the death of a Member of Parliaments daughter was killed by a ‘want to be’ Plumber/kitchen fitter (if I recall correctly). It was introduced for all the right reasons but in reality has just made a business for training organisations to get money out of non-electrical tradespersons to get a qualification or piece of paper with a limited amount of training. The long and the short of it, anyone can call themselves an electrician. Whether or not you have any qualifications or not. On the flip side to the above, whilst people want cheap jobs done, corners (rightly or wrongly) will be cut. Ask yourself this question, if you were quoted £300 to change a Distribution Board or £400 to get it complete with the certification, why would you bother. Who is interested in a bit of paper? And even if you do try and do right, sadly, there are Electricians out there who don’t care and will certify anything or just add limitations to the test and inspection certificate making it all as good as useless - like getting an MOT where the tester marks on the certificate that the brakes, steering and the lights wern’t checked. I see this kind of thing over and over again. The occupier gets a bit of paper and everyone is happy? This said, there are some great Electricians who are conscientious and do quality work. How you find one, that, I am afraid is the million dollar question as there is no one like Gassafe controlling the work. You mostly get what you pay for. Get quotes and ask questions. The lowest quote will be low for a good reason. |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 5:55pm |
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6298
|
the remarkable thing for me with this a large National Company did the work (no doubt via a sub contractor) and the consumer unit was replaced and two circuits.
only the two circuits show on the test certificate and it would appear at the same time at least one of the circuits was made to look like it have been replaced with PVC. there's no doubt the place needs re-wiring completely. the test cert suggests bonding is in place and that it was replaced - it wasn't (unless of course they used second hand cabling). in fact the more I look at the cert it's not worth the paper it's written on. of the two circuits both were for elec heaters. both on 16A MCBs. one is 2.5mm & 1.5mm CPC. the other 4mm & 1.5mm CPC. the large 4mm has a higher impedance and there's even mention of RCD trip times - no RCD's either! Damn it....penny just dropped. paper work is for the Off peak consumer unit which I've not even seen. There doesn't appear to be any paper work for the Peak consumer unit.  |
||
|
11th Nov 2018 7:12pm |
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6298
|
you have to smile don't you.
was looking round a large reasonably prestigious office the other day (less than 5 years old) there's loads of cable trays but out on the roof one area caught my attention where there's cables trays effectively running flat along the floor with SWA cables tied down metallic cables ties. Adjacent there's a large cable tray running flat along a wall with SWA secured with ...... yes you guessed it plastic cable ties  |
||
|
25th Jan 2020 4:57pm |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
