"terminate and test 5 No electric sockets" ???

1984ReturnsForReal_2

DVardysShadow wrote: »

There is still a last port of call on a ring. If they were being excessively pedantic they could have disconnected the whole ring.

You are actually the first person to say that this is a ring.

There is some lack of clarity in the narrative here from Leif over the 5 sockets. Now it may be that the electrician was waiting for the 5 sockets to be done before testing. But if this is the case, the rework would be a known part of the scope of works [to the electrician at least] and should have been costed up front.

Its sockets.

Its 5 sockets.

Its a new consumer unit.

Its on a ring.

Its an empty premises.

Its a kitchen install.

Its test twice or test once after completion of everything not prior to the kitchen installation which the OP assumed incorrectly.

OP took it upon himself to do it without telling anyone. That has been clarified.

Leif

DVardysShadow wrote: »

There is some lack of clarity in the narrative here from Leif over the 5 sockets.

Perhaps but not intentionally so. The electricians were working for the project manager not me, and he had no way to know I would replace the face plates. I asked them to prepare the electrics for the kitchen, and there was no reason to wait almost two weeks to put in the fuse box.

CashisKing

Either the sockets were already tested and therefore should have been signed off or they hadn't been tested and you should be paying for the remaking, but not the testing?

DVardysShadow

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

Its sockets.

Its 5 sockets.

Its a new consumer unit.

Its on a ring.

Its an empty premises.

Its a kitchen install.

Its test twice or test once after completion of everything not prior to the kitchen installation which the OP assumed incorrectly.

OP took it upon himself to do it without telling anyone. That has been clarified.

You

are

the

first

person

to

say

it

is

on

a

ring.

If we must communicate in thick speak.

Leif

DVardysShadow wrote: »

You

are

the

first

person

to

say

it

is

on

a

ring.

If we must communicate in thick speak.

The five sockets are not on one ring. One lounge socket is on a ring shared with kitchen sockets. One other socket is on a lighting ring. The others are on a third ring. It's all a bit odd, but a lot of old work on my house was badly done, by Bodger Bill and his mates.

I still do not think it reasonable to leave almost two months between the kitchen rewire and the fuse box install, and expect the owner to not touch any sockets when they knew full well I was decorating. I also do not think it acceptable to test at the start, and have that as part of the certificate issued two months later.

Leif

andrew-b wrote: »

Lounge sockets shouldn't be on the kitchen ring really. Absolutely no sockets should be on the lighting circuit whatsoever (with the exception of 5amp round pin sockets and shaver sockets). Are you sure they haven't charged you to connect these sockets to a ring main circuit instead..if they have then charging you would be entirely reasonable. Mind you, you don't seem to know what they've done. If there are sockets on a lighting circuit these need attention pronto.

No, they have even put labels on the fuse box which confirms the odd layout. I was surprised. What is wrong with a socket on a lighting circuit? (As I understand it there are separate rings because different devices have different loads. So the cooker is on its own ring with a high current capacity.)

The whole house is a bit cack eyed. All of the sockets are at an angle, as revealed by a spirit level. Whoever put them in was drunk.

zax47

Leif wrote: »

...What is wrong with a socket on a lighting circuit? .....

Are you serious?

The whole of each of your lighting circuits is rated at 5A or 6A load maximum (protected by a 5A fuse or 6A breaker at the CU). A single socket can draw up to 13A, and a double socket potentially up to 26A (although it is not advsed to have 2 high load devices each drawing 13A on the same double socket).

Sockets are usually installed on a ring circuit to offset the maximum potential load vs the diameter of the cable required. Sockets may be installed on a radial circuit but could need 4mm cable (depending on the design load), not the 2.5mm cable generally used for a ring. Sockets on a radial using 2.5mm cable must be protected by a 20A fuse or breaker, rather than the 32A one used for sockets on a ring, to protect the CABLE from damage due to overloading.

Lighting is installed on a radial circuit as it's only low load and uses 1mm or 1.5mm cable. A single socket on a lighting circuit can thus exceed the rated capability of the 1mm or 1.5mm cable!

On the few occasions where you may put a socket on a lighting circuit (say in a loft, to power a TV aerial amplifier) then it should be marked "For light loads ONLY- 3A MAX", it MUST be connected by an FCU (fused connection unit) and the FCU MUST be fused down to 3A (NOT 13A), again to protect the CABLE from damage and prevent a fire.

Of course, a qualified electrician will take this into account when designing the installation, whereas a DIYer will just bodge it and hope.

Got it yet......

keystone

Leif wrote: »

One lounge socket is on a ring shared with kitchen sockets. One other socket is on a lighting ring. The others are on a third ring.

It's all a bit odd

only a bit? :rotfl:


Cheers

Leif

zax47 wrote: »

Are you serious?

The whole of each of your lighting circuits is rated at 5A or 6A load maximum (protected by a 5A fuse or 6A breaker at the CU). A single socket can draw up to 13A, and a double socket potentially up to 26A (although it is not advsed to have 2 high load devices each drawing 13A on the same double socket).

Sockets are usually installed on a ring circuit to offset the maximum potential load vs the diameter of the cable required. Sockets may be installed on a radial circuit but could need 4mm cable (depending on the design load), not the 2.5mm cable generally used for a ring. Sockets on a radial using 2.5mm cable must be protected by a 20A fuse or breaker, rather than the 32A one used for sockets on a ring, to protect the CABLE from damage due to overloading.

Lighting is installed on a radial circuit as it's only low load and uses 1mm or 1.5mm cable. A single socket on a lighting circuit can thus exceed the rated capability of the 1mm or 1.5mm cable!

On the few occasions where you may put a socket on a lighting circuit (say in a loft, to power a TV aerial amplifier) then it should be marked "For light loads ONLY- 3A MAX", it MUST be connected by an FCU (fused connection unit) and the FCU MUST be fused down to 3A (NOT 13A), again to protect the CABLE from damage and prevent a fire.

Of course, a qualified electrician will take this into account when designing the installation, whereas a DIYer will just bodge it and hope.

Got it yet......

Your first and last remarks sound somewhat rude, and are not called for. However, your main post is very informative, so thank you. I am not an electricaian, and generally avoid electrics apart from simple stuff such as replacing a front plate, or a mounting box. It could have been a DIY bodger who put the socket on a lighting ring. The installation of a double socket in place of a single one was a right bodge, which I fixed. Anyway, if a socket is on a lighting circuit, and these electricians passed it without comment, that does not say much for them does it? I think I will have words, and hope the wires were thicker, and they connected to an appropriate fuse in the fuse box.

There are other odd things about the house, such as the fact that it is built on a 12" 'float' of concrete. Seems to be the norm for all the houses here.

Leif

andrew-b wrote: »

Should the installation of a consumer pass it's testing if a 13amp socket is indeed connected to a lighting circuit though? I would hope not.

A very good question. I will have to check this to be sure, as it is possible I am mistaken, but I remember finding that a socket and lights went out when I cut off one ring.