Changing light switch - how to confirm live/dead circuit
- Thread starter jonnyw
- Start date
Sponsored Links
It's criminal damage. There is no likelihood anybody would be charged, but it's damaging the suppliers property.
I would have thought that it could only be "criminal damage" if some damage was done. Unless you are thinking about breaking the seals (if present!), I don't see that one could be charged with that offence if no actual damage had been caused.
Kind Regards, John
Does that mean when DNO staff do it, it's just damage?
Sponsored Links
As I said, maybe he was thinking about 'damaging the seals' - since (if seals are present) either DNO staff or anyone else have to 'damage' them in order to get at the fuse. As has been said, such a prosecution is never going to happen but, if it did, in the absence of a 'confession', I don't think a Court would get very far in terms of establishing who had 'damaged' the seals!
Many many moons ago, I lived for about 10 years in a house which never had any seals on the cutout, and that was nothing to do with me!
Kind Regards, John
The cut out does not belong to the customer and the only way to get in is to break the seal, hence the damage (assuming the seal pixies have not been). I doubt anybody would face prosecution for this. The cutout itself is part of the national grid and can only be worked on with DNO permission. That is covered by statute.
Quite so - and, as I've just written, even if there were a prosecution, I think that it would be extremely difficult get a conviction - those pixies have been so active that it's hard to see how a court could determine 'beyond a reasonable doubt' who had actually been responsible for the 'criminal damage'!
You didn't really even need to make the point. Your reason (2) (a risk of death) is surely a more effective deterrent than the risk of being prosecuted for criminally damaging something worth a few pence?!
Kind Regards, John
Norman Stanley Fletcher, you are charged with the wilful destruction of a one inch piece of wire. How do you plead?
FFS
the cutout is part of the grid, which is covered by ESQCR, and breaking the seal is MINOR criminal damage.
As John has now posted, the potential danger is more important to the OP.
the cutout is part of the grid, which is covered by ESQCR, and breaking the seal is MINOR criminal damage.
As John has now posted, the potential danger is more important to the OP.
"Criminal Damage" is nothing to do with ESQCR. As for offences under ESQCR, all I can find is ...
and ...ESQCR said:
Nothing I can find about damaging seals or, indeed, about a consumer 'interfering' with DNO equipment in any way.8(4) and 34(2) of ESQCR said:
Indeed, and if you had restricted yourself to just making that crucial point, without muddying the waters by mentioning a criminal offence for which no-one would ever be prosecuted, EFLI would not have had to question you!
Kind Regards, John
OMG
the OP doesn't own the cutout and the only way to get at the fuse is to break something (the seal)
I would say that is an example of criminal damage. Common law I believe is the phrase.
The cutout is part of the national grid and that is covered by the ESQCR.
To pull the fuse requires permission from the DNO, but as I'm not a lawyer, I can't quote the part that not getting permission would contravene.
I am done with this now.
the OP doesn't own the cutout and the only way to get at the fuse is to break something (the seal)
I would say that is an example of criminal damage. Common law I believe is the phrase.
The cutout is part of the national grid and that is covered by the ESQCR.
To pull the fuse requires permission from the DNO, but as I'm not a lawyer, I can't quote the part that not getting permission would contravene.
I am done with this now.
Indeed it is. I am no lawyer, either, but I imagine that breaking someone else's seal probably technically counts as that offence. However, not only is no-one ever going to be prosecuted for that offence but, as I said, a conviction would be very difficult, and, even if they somehow managed to get a conviction, the 'sentence' for criminally damaging something worth a few pence would probably be laughable.
I quoted all the bits of ESQCR which appear to relate to offences under ESQCR. As I said, somewhat to my surprise, it doesn't even include 'interfering' with DNO (or 'National Grid') property. As you have implied, they seem to rely on Common Law to deal with these matters.
Fair enough. As I said, had you restricted yourself to indicate that the activity in question was potential lethal, and not brought this trivial 'criminal offence' into the equation, none of this discussion would ever have happened.
Kind Regards, John
You missed the point.
It's not about whether one should or should not isolate the entire installation to change a light switch. It's about whether anybody, having decided that they should, would then go and do so whilst another family member was cooking, or showering, etc.
There aren't that many things that would cause me to isolate the entire 'installation' (primarily things involving work within a CU) but if/when I need to do that for a very brief period, yes, I would do that if someone was cooking (if I had an electric cooker!), having given them a 'warning' - but I wouldn't do it if someone was using an electric shower (although, again, although I have one, it only ever gets used at Christmas, a time of year when I rarely undertake electrical work of any sort!).
Kind Regards, John
Oh well - I guess I'll just have to remain completely unable to understand why some people think that changing a light switch is such an important thing to do that it must not be allowed to wait until the cooker isn't being used.
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links