The age old electricity question?!?!?!

How would you terminate SWA in that?

Overall I have to say I find the views expressed here on the Wiring Regulations and the Building Regulations pretty appalling, and that a site moderator should write

is shameful.

Do any of you advocating law-breaking remember this:

By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

?

That Part P was ill-considered and unnecessary is, I'm afraid, irrelevant, and finding it irksome is not sufficient grounds for advocating breaking it.

And as for basic safety, and the notion that the Wiring Regulations are to be dismissed as "part of the nanny state", perhaps those of you who feel that way should discuss your ideas with Baroness Tonge whose daughter died because of someone who also thought that way.

 

Unless a rewire was needed because the installation was damaged by the flooding, or your wiring was already dangerous then I'm afraid you were the victim of a "rogue trader".

So it sounds as though beforehand you did not have RCD protection, and afterwards you did - a valuable improvement in safety.

That it showed you had a faulty appliance is probably not a bad thing, but cookers are known to be inherently leaky, and there may well have been an alternative to replacing it - again I would question the competence of your electrician rather than the validity of the regulations.

Regulations change - there's nothing to stop you rewiring again to bring what you have into line with the 17th if you want to, but there is no compulsion.

 

I dont expect people to do as I say, its just an opinion.

People are free do as they think fit.


I might be a mod (perhaps), but that dont mean I dont have an opinion.
And that is all it was, AN OPINION.

 

Edited as it no longer makes sense.

 

I reply to an'EXPERT' member,who's comments have been edited because of the content........My reply....

"Incompetent Craftsmen?? :DWhat a Smooth talker you are..Bet you say that to everyone who smacks you in the mouth":rolleyes:

 

Sorry - that just doesn't wash.

The way the exchange went was like this:

That is more than just you stating your opinion - that is you giving advice to the OP. It is wrong for anyone to advise breaking the law, let alone someone in a position of responsibility on the forum.

 

I'D just like to illustrate why I tend to think the way I do, this is just one example, a building site in my local park, completely open to the public.

Amoured cable just laying on the ground, bringing power to the sequrity shed, complete with flood light.


They have even recently tarmaced over it, it was originally on the top of a wire fence which has now been dismantled.


Then it goes up and over the wall.
At this point it has been snagged by a JCB and has a really nasty kink in the cable.


At the sequrity box there is a flood light that has just a dark blue flex going to it, easily in reach, i could cut it any time if,I wanted to.
Also chained to the wire fencing is a transformer, presumable stepping the voltage down to 110V, and a yellow flex twisted into the wire going off into the distance.



Now can you say that a short length of amoured cable fixed to a fence is dangerous, and before you point out that this is just a tempory job, its been there two years now.

 

But, as you say, this cable was attatched to a fence.

Surely this demonstrates the very reason why it is not acceptable to do this?

 

It's hard to decide when trying again to explain the point becomes arguing for the sake of it, but maybe this analogy is worth a try.

Yesterday I was driving along a road with a 30mph speed limit, and I was overtaken by someone doing at least 50mph.

He didn't crash or knock anybody over.

The fact that he got away with it that time does not mean that speed limits can be dismissed as part of the nanny state and that it's OK to tell people to ignore the law and drive as fast as they like.

 

NO ONE TOLD ANYONE TO DO ANYTHING. We are talking individual opinions here.

 

The point I am trying to make is that if a large constuction company can get away with doing such things as this, and in a public place.

Therefore if thats deemed aceptable, surely something on very much smaller scale in a private place must be OK as well.

 

Woah! I could tell this was a bit of a can of worms from the results of the web searches I found before I posted this but I didn't expect three pages of arguments!

You'll all be glad to hear that I've decided to keep everything outside low voltage... I have no intention of paying someone with a certificate to dig up my patio to put a trench down to make my 240V install legal so I've got a low voltage pump arriving tomorrow and I'll be drilling a hole in the lounge wall, keeping all my transormers inside and running 24V and 12V outside. The obvious advantage of this is that I can switch everying on independently from inside (a god send in UK weather!).

Please don't argue, I like this forum =)

Rich

 

http://www.pondprofessorpumps.co.uk/pumpsforlowvoltage.htmDodgie a 24v pump can pump up to 4,000 lph and is pefectly adequate for your needs I think you are going about it in the right way here's a link that is useful.

 

Its not an argument Dodgie,.. its a disscussion:D

Anyway glad you have sorted out whats best for you.

 

Well I better not say how I wired up the pond pumps at my last house then (which is still standing).

Might get reported to a mod for posting something sort of erm, dangerous or flippant, heh,heh.:D

Put it this way...I thought it was extremely safe and worked a treat. But probably against every rule in the new books.:rolleyes:

Oop's did I say that.............:eek:

Do you think I should get rid of these Rolex (or was that Solex, can't remember now) round pin centre with flat prongs either side plugs and get 13 amp sockets and plugs fitted. Quite like the smell of smoldering Bakelite.