Consumer Unit OK?

[flameport]

but if the RSJ across the back has not been spec'd properly, then can't see how we could go ahead.

By reducing the price even more - including as far as the entire extension has to be demolished and rebuilt.
Everything has a price, and adding/altering a house can easily decrease it's value if it's been done badly.

 

[jagillham]

By reducing the price even more - including as far as the entire extension has to be demolished and rebuilt.
Everything has a price, and adding/altering a house can easily decrease it's value if it's been done badly.

I think at that point simply not worth the bother for us.

New roof on the extension, maybe. Full rewire, possibly. Full knock down... I've got better things to be doing!

 

[cjard]

And, in fact, all the Building Regulations certificate(s) and Planning Permissions for the extension.



And if you decide to walk away, report them to the council for Building Regulations and Planning contraventions.

Likely pointless as if it was done in 2013, it's beyond the time limit for enforcement

 

[srhawksy]

And, in fact, all the Building Regulations certificate(s) and Planning Permissions for the extension.



And if you decide to walk away, report them to the council for Building Regulations and Planning contraventions.

Jesus. You must be a barrel of laughs!

 

[JohnW2]

Jesus. You must be a barrel of laughs!

You seem to be very perceptive!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I assumed it was sarcasm, in which case he is just the opposite.

 

[JohnW2]

I assumed it was sarcasm, in which case he is just the opposite.

I assumed differently.

Kind Regards, John

 

[securespark]

Just knock 4K off for a rewire.

Apologies to fp. I never learn.

 

[jagillham]

Thanks all for the replies and advise.

Today I've received a 'Electrical Installation Certificate'. It's issued 30/07/2015 by a local outfit who are NICEIC, and the stated works are 'Full Rewire'. Should there also be a certificate from the council / building control?

Not sure if this means anything to anybody here (means nothing to me!), but I've put the test page in below.

I really can't imagine any proper electrician would leave a terminal block exposed. Surely not for the sake of a 99p choc box?!

The only electrics I am aware of being added since the 2015 rewire (and sale of house) is outside lights around the patio. The switch for those is under the sink too next to the double socket.

Sorry if this has already been answered, but I've re-read the thread and can't see it. Is there any reason to run a single neutral wire into the consumer unit like has been done?

 

[Iggifer]

What it means to me is they haven’t done a proper test of their installation.

The numbers are too precise. The end to end for a ring final should have Rcpc and 1.5x that of r1 and rn. Which it does, exactly on both circuits. r1 and rn are both identical too. There’s nothing technically wrong with this but it’s incredibly unlikely - the end to end and Zs readings are affected by how tight every screw is in the circuit - not impossible to get them all nearly the same with a torque driver but there is still some tolerance and the accuracy of the meter will throw some variation in too.

And he’s also a muppet for installing a ring final for 4 Sockets (plus he missed points served for one lighting circuit)

Oh, and 4 circuits in a rewire? No cooker/smoke alarms/boiler/immersion heater/shower etc

 

[jagillham]

Is the 'points served' literally the number of sockets on that ring?

In the kitchen there is 4 double sockets above the counter. There is a double under the sink (well there is one there now, I'm assuming it's original given the fridge/dishwasher gap). Oven has to plug into something, as does that extractor.

 

[JohnW2]

The numbers are too precise. The end to end for a ring final should have Rcpc and 1.5x that of r1 and rn. Which it does, exactly on both circuits. r1 and rn are both identical too. There’s nothing technically wrong with this but it’s incredibly unlikely

As you say, very unlikely - but, I would say, also incorrect (and, worse, 'identically incorrect' for the two circuits) ...

... although you say that R2 (Rcpc) should be 1.5 times R1 or Rn (which IS what they have recorded), with 2.5/1.5mm² cable, unless I'm missing something it should surely be 1.67 times (if one uses the CSAs) or 1.61 times (if one uses relative resistivities per the 'Voltage Drop' tables in regs).

If I've got this right, it seems even more suspicious than you suggested!

Kind Regards, John

 

[Iggifer]

As you say, very unlikely - but, I would say, also incorrect (and, worse, 'identically incorrect' for the two circuits) ...

... although you say that R2 (Rcpc) should be 1.5 times R1 or Rn (which IS what they have recorded), with 2.5/1.5mm² cable, unless I'm missing something it should surely be 1.67 times (if one uses the CSAs) or 1.61 times (if one uses relative resistivities per the 'Voltage Drop' tables in regs).

If I've got this right, it seems even more suspicious than you suggested!

Kind Regards, John

You’re quite right of course. Should read 1.7 in my post. Long day

 

[JohnW2]

You’re quite right of course. Should read 1.7 in my post. Long day

No problem.

If your typing fingers had obeyed you and typed "1.7", you probably would have noticed that what they recorded was '1.5 times' - which might possibly suggest that not only didn't they measure R2, but that they calculated it using the same incorrect figure that you actually typed! For them to have actually measured R2 as only 1.5 times R1 (or Rn), for both circuits, would seem to be rather stretching likely co-incidences!

Kind Regards, John

 

[jagillham]

Well I'm going to honest, I have no clue what you two are talking about!

However, what I think I do get is basically the test results are essentially an impossibility, therefore faked?

Something worth taking up with NICEIC?