Is this a new circuit?

It would be for the courts to deside. .... There is unlikely to be a court case unless some one dies. So it hardly matters if it is or is not new, as without a death no one cares.
I'm not sure why you are always so keen/quick to 'pass the buck' of such decision-making to a hypothetical 'court', not the least because, even if such questions were ever tested in Court (which I very much doubt they ever would be), in the absence of having any technical competence themselves, a Court would, in turn, have to rely on the personal opinion(s) of one or more 'expert witnesses'.

In any event, even in the extreme situation you mention, I cannot see why a Court would bother to form or express any opinion as to whether or not the electrical work represented creation of a 'new circuit'. As you know, the relevant Law (Part P of the Building Regs) applies to all electrical work, regardless of whether or not the work is 'notifiable'. Hence, if a Court decided that someone was criminally culpable under that Law for undertaking electrical work which had resulted in death, they would presumably still hold that view even if the work undertaken was not 'notifiable' (e.g., in England, if the work had not involved creation of a 'new circuit').

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
This feels like we are back in 2005, looking for ways to get around notifying LABC. The fact you are reusing the MCB and cable is irrelevant. It's a new circuit supplying a cooker. The existing circuit was installed to supply a shower. This is just my opinion.
 
This feels like we are back in 2005, looking for ways to get around notifying LABC. The fact you are reusing the MCB and cable is irrelevant. It's a new circuit supplying a cooker. The existing circuit was installed to supply a shower. This is just my opinion.
Good to hear from you. I hope all is well with you and yours and that you've had as good a holiday period as prevailing circumstances have allowed.

I would personally say 2013, rather than 2005, since (as remains the case today in Wales) between 2005 and 2013 very little electrical work was not notifiable (as you know, just a very few, explicitly specified, things).

As you imply, opinions about interpretation will vary, although I'm sure that a good few people would totally agree with your personal opinion.

However, as always, maybe a little common sense is also probably appropriate when it comes to 'repurposing' of circuits (without chnge of OPD and, often, without much change to wiring). For example, very many immersion circuits became re-purposed as 16A sockets radials (often with just one or two sockets) when people changed to using combi boilers, and I personally see little really being gained by calling that a 'new circuit', thereby rendering it notifiable - do you?

My very Best Wishes to you and yours for a healthy, happy and successful 2022.

Kind Regards, John
 
Good point about the shower circuit becoming a cooker circuit, the fact that the circuit will be relabelled at the cu could make a difference.

I suppose it's not much different to removing an immersion switch and the immersion heater; then replacing the switch for a SFCU to supply a new boiler. I shouldn't think that gets classed as a new circuit in the real world, especially if labelled water heater, and with the trend of boilers now going in lofts, the existing wiring will sometimes be extended.

Just thinking out aloud, have no definite answer to this.
 
Sponsored Links
“Are you suggesting that what was left (an MCB connected to metre or so of downstream cable) would not constitute 'a circuit'?”

No

“If so, do you believe that one could install a new MCB feeding a short length of cable in an existing CU without that constituting a 'new circuit' (which, if it were, would be notifiable in England”

No

Blup
 
It's a new circuit, and it's notifiable.

Doesn't make any difference to anything, as the majority of DIY work is not notified even when it should be.
 
The "installation of a new circuit" is one of the three notifiable things in England.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/3119/regulation/6/made



If we are looking for reasons for giving the local authority a couple of hundred pounds for nothing then, as this cable used to be a shower circuit, presumably it also entailed an "alteration to an existing circuit in a special location".
 
Good point about the shower circuit becoming a cooker circuit, the fact that the circuit will be relabelled at the cu could make a difference.
I have to say that I had assumed that any re-purposing of a cirecuit wiould be accompanied by an appropriate change to the labelling at the CU.
I suppose it's not much different to removing an immersion switch and the immersion heater; then replacing the switch for a SFCU to supply a new boiler. I shouldn't think that gets classed as a new circuit in the real world, especially if labelled water heater, and with the trend of boilers now going in lofts, the existing wiring will sometimes be extended.
Quite so. However, as I said, probably more common (I've seen many examples) to see the connection to a immersion heater (from a dedicated circuit) removed and replaced with one or two sockets (when the DHW cylinder + immersion was removed) - and, as I said, I see no real reason for classifying that as a ('notifiable') 'new circuit'.
Just thinking out aloud, have no definite answer to this.
As I said, I don't think that there is, in general, any 'definite answer' when it comes to re-purposing a circuit. In such circumstances, individual judgement is required (aka 'common sense', which is sometimes lacking).

Kind Regards, John
 
JohnW2 said:
Are you suggesting that what was left (an MCB connected to metre or so of downstream cable) would not constitute 'a circuit'?
No
If you're not suggesting that, why were you suggesting that it could not be extended for any purpose (which, in England, would not be notifiable) without creating a 'new circuit'?

Kind Regards, John
 
It's a new circuit, and it's notifiable.
As I've often written to you, I do think that many of your assertions probably should be prefaced by an indication that you are expressing personal opinions, particularly given that you enjoy a degree of 'celebrity' which probably makes your words appear particularly 'authoritative' to many!

As has been said (and despite your assertion), opinions vary as to what constitutes a 'new circuit'.
Doesn't make any difference to anything, as the majority of DIY work is not notified even when it should be.
You must have some sort of 'protected status' since, if I wrote that (and true though the statement is), I think it very likely that I would be taken to task for 'encouraging non-notification of notifiable work' :)

Happy NewYear!

Kind Regards, John
 
Are you suggesting that what was left (an MCB connected to metre or so of downstream cable) would not constitute 'a circuit'?
Since it does not supply electrical equipment, it is not a circuit, in the same way the lighting circuit is not a circuit unless at least one light is switched on.

So every time you switch a light on, to make a circuit, but not a new circuit, the circuit has been made before.

BS 7671 states "supplied from the same origin and protected against over current by the same protective device(s)." this means adding FCU will form a new circuit, however if supplied from a ring final then can't have any new circuit supplied from a final circuit. It is the final circuit so there can't be any more.

We are not looking at electrics here, we are looking at the English language.

So if a bit of electrical equipment has not been supplied from a protective device before then it is a new circuit. Unless supplied from a final circuit, so there is a little leeway here as we need to define a final circuit.

So for the example given where an immersion heater is removed and replaced with sockets, I think we must accept it was a final circuit, as will most circuits starting at the consumer unit, where it is not so cut and dried is where it feeds a second consumer unit, however if a MCB/RCBO/Fuse has ever fed a piece of electrical equipment (not another distribution unit) then in English had to show not new.

However as I said before, it would need a court to decide, so the main thing is if using an installation certificate or a minor works certificate, I would say if using a minor works it is not a new circuit, that does not mean it is a new circuit if using a installation certificate, but if a minor works has been used, it shows the person doing the work considered at the time it was not a new circuit.

Clearly any electrical work must be to the required standard and to show it is to required standard or at least the person doing the work thought it was, it needs a completed minor works certificate. If some one fails to complete the paperwork, it points to them trying to distance themselves from the work done, and would make it hard to show they considered what they have done was compliant, clearly even with a minor works certificate the work could still be a death trap, but it would point to the worker being unaware of it being a death trap, rather than a simple laissez-faire attitude.

Most laws are written with the idea they will be added to with case law, the Welsh Part P leaves very little leeway, I question if the Blagdon pond wiring system really gets around the law that a garden is a special location, however since they have not been taken to court to my knowledge, it seems we in Wales can get away with using it, and I think it is a get away with it, rather then following the sprite of the law.

To install a consumer unit with a 13 amp or other size socket supplied from every overload device which can then latter be replaced with another device would not be in the sprite of the law, but I would think it would be a brave inspector to try and take it to court as illegal, he is more likely to use electricity as work act or other law and look at dangers rather than the silly method used to try and get around the law.
 
If you're not suggesting that, why were you suggesting that it could not be extended for any purpose (which, in England, would not be notifiable) without creating a 'new circuit'?

Kind Regards, John

Because not not suggesting that an mcb, connected to a metre or so of downstream cable, is not not a circuit, is not the same as saying it is not a new circuit when connected up to a new cooker.

Incidentally the OP refers to an mcb in the CU, so presumably an rcd would be required, further cementing the point that this is a new circuit.

Blup
 

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
Back
Top