MCB needs replacing on house circuits to sell or not?

Dilfred

Not sure if this is the right section of the forum, please move if needed, but it seemed to fit.
Saving money (not having to fit new circuit board) while trying to sell house.

I am in the process of selling the house and during the questions raised by the buyer they asked to confirm some electrical modifications done in 2009.
I wired an additional wall light into the existing lighting circuit.

I have called out an electrician to check the wiring and Part P sign it off as it's all exposeable, however he raised a bigger question.

The house's Main Circuit board does not meet the requirements that changed in 2008 (ie not enough breakers or something)

Interestingly, if I had not made the modification to the light, I would not have declared the wiring changed in the last few years and therefore would not have called an electrician to be told my house will fail Part P testing.
The new buyer did not do any survey and had basically accepted the house as it is, so would have moved in unaware of the older style wiring. However now, I effectively am forced to admit and potentially pay to reboard the house (circ £500 for new board and testing the wiring)

What should I do? I have not got back to my solicitor about this yet, so he is awaiting the certificate signing the house off. Should I give instead a quote of £500 for new MCB and test sign off instead?

Should I pay for it now asap and just get it done, should I not pay as they were not interested in it before, should I negotiate 50:50.

Interestingly, this has made me think about the property I am about to move into as that was built over 100 years ago, so very unlikely to pass unless rewiring / new fuse box has been completed etc.

Any thoughts before I bother my solicitor and start asking him the negoitation questions.

I am also wanting a quick sale, and was hoping to complete in the next few weeks, so don't want to slow things down for the buyer or ourselves really.

THank you in advance

googler

Remove the wall light and leave the wiring as it was before you added it?

As regards the house you're moving to - yes, it won't comply with current regulations, but houses that were built before regulation changes still sell.
I sold my Mum's house, built in 1971, with old-style wire on block fuses in the consumer unit, without any bother at all.

Totally non-compliant with the new regulations, but built before them

timbo58

Does that really NEED to be done?
I just bought a house (reposessed if it makes any difference) and I had no such warning about it failing current standards.
Let's face it standards change every so many years in any case.

I am not at all sure I would have considered a simple spur addition of an outside light to be 'a change in the household wiring' in any case.


Mine had rewireable fuses in a wylex CU and mounted on wood, sockets surface mounted on the skirtings and all sorts of (shock, horror) 'failures' of modern standards, what a surprise in a house built in 1936!

I have changed the rewireables to plug in MCBs but theres still no RCD on any sockets/shower/outside socket or kitchen supply, the wiring otherwise is in good condition and properly earthed.
I don't think this is inherently unsafe, just desirable to change these at a later stage when funds allow or I change the kitchen/shower or add in a garden shed to the ring or separate circuit.

Doozergirl

Why are you being forced to reveal this? Most properties won't meet the most up to date standard. You're only forced to reveal the true answer to an exact question. It sounds like the question relates to a small piece of work, not the entire wiring of the house.

I'm surprised you answered anything regarding the addition of one wall light. The questions in the pack relate only to major work. Is there a cert for the wall light or not?

jamesperrett

I thought that adding a spur didn't require Part P approval so there should have been no need to call in an electrician in the first place.

CloudCuckooLand

You cannot backtrack now. The buyer knows about 2009 mods. If you try to "reinvent" those mods, that will risk them getting suspicious...

If the work you did was not "to standard", that is exactly why a properly qualified person should have done it, as they would have spotted the issue in 2009, and either not done the work, done it in a different way if possible, or got the MCB replaced, as appropriate.

Edtough

Sorry to hijack this thread, but do you necessarily HAVE to provide a certificate for electrics when selling a place? Obviously the buyer can ask for one, but is it mandatory to have one to sell a place these days?

DVardysShadow

This is simple. Only work done after 2005 [?] needs signing off. The old fusebox , if it was put in before 2005 does not need to be certified, particularly as you have added no new circuits..

Homersimpson

I'm assujming that the electricain has picked you up because the circuit only has an MCB on it and to comply with the 17th edition of the IEE wiring regulations in a typical house installation you would need an RCD on the circuits. As stated above you are under no obligation to improve and existing electrical installation if completed prior to the new regulations (there is statement in the front of the 17th edition to this effect), therefore the only circuit that is of concern is the one you have altered. You have three options:-

1. Remove the modifcation (as stated above) and if the purchasers will be ok with this.

2. Pay the electrican to fit a new consumer unit with two seperate split sections with RCD protection on each side (Which is probably what the electrician has advised you to do).

3. Get the electricain to fit a seperate enclosure next to the distribution board with an RCD in it and connect the circuit that you have modified to this and then feed this from the MCB in the consumer unit.

If option 1 is not feasible then I would recommend option 3 because whilst the materials cost between option 2 and 3 is not huge the labour content will be significantly less, also once you have the consumer unit changed the electrician should test all of the wiring which may then lead to more work being required, depending upon the age of the installation the main bonds may need to be installed/upgraded and also the installation of RCD devices may cause problems for some equipment (if you have an old oven they can cause nusance tripping.

In addition to this a lot of houses are wired so that the landing light is fed from the ground floor circuit and "borrows" a neutral from the first floor circuit, this will cause problems if the electrician connects one lighting circuit to each side of the consumer unit.

All in all if it were a house you were staying in then option 2 would be the way to go but option 3 is safe an complys with the relevant regulations. If your electrician isn't keen on this then he either doesn't understand the regulations or is trying to make more work for himself. He should explain top you the options you have not just give you the most expensive.

Its the equivalent of going to garage because you need new front brake pads and them selling you new discs and pads all around just because the ones on the car are old!

Best of luck!

DVardysShadow

Homersimpson wrote: »

.... You have three options:-

1. Remove the modifcation (as stated above) and if the purchasers will be ok with this.

2. Pay the electrican to fit a new consumer unit with two seperate split sections with RCD protection on each side (Which is probably what the electrician has advised you to do).

3. Get the electricain to fit a seperate enclosure next to the distribution board with an RCD in it and connect the circuit that you have modified to this and then feed this from the MCB in the consumer unit.

There is another option

4. Leave it as it it is.

As a lighting circuit, it is compliant without an RCD. It does not fall under the list of systems in 411.3.3 of 17th ed which require additional protection. As I understand it, split load consumer units are only required to comply with 314.1 iv - ie to ensure that lights are not taken out by an earth fault on an unrelated circuit - ie it is perfectly OK not to have an RCD on a lighting circuit. At least, that is my reading. As ever, you need to check the advice out - and also filter out ever so slightly misleading information from over zealous marketers of consumer units and wirers of premises

Homersimpson

DVardysShadow wrote: »

There is another option

4. Leave it as it it is.

As a lighting circuit, it is compliant without an RCD. It does not fall under the list of systems in 411.3.3 of 17th ed which require additional protection. As I understand it, split load consumer units are only required to comply with 314.1 iv - ie to ensure that lights are not taken out by an earth fault on an unrelated circuit - ie it is perfectly OK not to have an RCD on a lighting circuit. At least, that is my reading. As ever, you need to check the advice out - and also filter out ever so slightly misleading information from over zealous marketers of consumer units and wirers of premises

Almost correct but you need to refer to I think 522.6.7 (not got my regs book to hand) which covers cable installation in walls and in a domestic installation you almost certainly need to protect all of the circuits with an RCD (hence the two RCD split load consumer units which have replaced the old one RCD one Isolator split load consumer units used under the 16th edition). Strictly speaking you only need to provide an RCD to the section of cable you have installed but on a lighting circuit this is probably impractical. You could of course wire the cable on the surface of the wall or conceal the cable within a steel conduit (earthed) or wire it in a bit of armoured (again earthed) but this is unlikely to be achieveable in a domestic installation.

Provision of an RCD dedicated to the circuit that has been changed is more than likely the most cost effective way to achieve compliance.

Just for interest for anyone electrically trained reading this, there is an exemption for installations under the control of specially trained persons when for example you don't need to install an RCD to a lighting circuit installed in wall less than 50mm from the surface of the wall and not in an earth metallic enclosure (i.e recessed T+E) , now the only installation I can think that would apply to is my own house because i'm the only one that will ever work on it in any way and i'm a qualified electrical engineer, in all other circumstances I can't see how this can apply. I've worked in a lot of hospitals and they are now using PVC conduit for cheapness (boo hiss) and as such they need to provide an RCD on the circuit no matter what it does as can't guarantee that no one will drill a hole into a wall without authorisation as they have so many subcontractors supplying things like paper towel dispensers, handriers, notice boardds etc. it would be impossible to approve the position of each hole prior to drilling.