blanking sockets in a bathroom, how much?

[slothrop23]

yeah tell me about it. its a weird set up and i'm kicking myself now for not looking at it, and didn't even ask when we were viewing to buy. DOH! i really need to chat to a sparky friend. he came round before and said something about agoing to the house insurance as its the whole house thats covered by the freeholders ( i did get permission first) but from my uneducated eye it appears unsafe and just silly.
as for cost my mate did it for £40 but said had it not been done so shoddily(is that a word?) it would have been about £90
Cheers!

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I recon part 1 a, b and c are applicable depending on what you do.

1. Work consisting of—

(a)replacing any fixed electrical equipment

Removing a socket is not replacing.

Adding a choc-block, or junction box or crimps where none existed before is not replacing.

(b)replacing a damaged cable for a single circuit only;

A cable which has been cut into lengths to run between sockets doesn't count as a "damaged" one.

(c)re-fixing or replacing enclosures of existing installation components, where the circuit protective measures are unaffected;

Adding a choc-block, or junction box or crimps where none existed before is not re-fixing or replacing enclosures of existing installation components.

you're either replacing and re-fixing a socket, albeit in another location,

Even if we accept that, it does not cover the components installed because the socket was removed from its original location.

or making a repair to a broken cable if you crimp it.. or replacing the damaged cable if you pull it between the 2 sockets either side and replace it.

See above re "damage" to cables. If you really think that cutting a cable in order to fix it into an accessory counts as damaging it then you can never sign an EIC, because you think that your work contravenes 522.8.1.

Get real - lengths of cable cut from a reel in order to connect accessories together etc have not been "damaged".

 

[ban-all-sheds]

To build means to make or increase, erect, construct so why should "Building Regulations" have anything to do with doing the opposite?

For the simple reason, Eric, that the Building Regulations define what the term "building work" means, and if you took the trouble to read them you'd know that.

So of course there will be no reference to removing anything in a building regulation.

Yes there maybe some regulations controlling demolition if fact I am sure there are and if your going to quote regulations it will be from those controlling demolition not building. Seems so simple I can't understand why no one seems to grasp it.

Try removing a chimney breast, or an internal wall, or roof timbers, or foundations, or ventilation fans, or thermal insulation, or sound insulation, or materials designed to slow the spread of fire, and argue that because it's not what you consider to be "building" that the Building Regulations don't apply, and see how far it gets you.

 

[IJWS15]

I am puzzled by this - if I remove a circuit from the CU entirely (including all wiring) then how can building regs be applied - there is NOTHING left to test!

Removing a chimney breast is not the same thing!

 

[davelx]

We're not arguing that this is a sensible state-of-affairs. Just that as the law stands, it IS the state-of-affairs. Whether or not those drawing up the legislation intended this effect is an entirely different discussion

 

[ban-all-sheds]

What they intended was to bring about an end to years of wheedling by NICEIC and the ECA trying to get it made illegal for non-NICEIC or ECA members to do electrical work.