Kitchen ring main cable size

[jason1976]

Hello i need to run a new kitchen ring main which is on a 32 amp MCB. Is 2.5mm twin and earth cable the correct size as it will be running through wall mounted plastic trunking and not under the floorboards as the existing one is. It will be connected to the consumer unit by a qualified electrician once i have run all the new cables through the trunking etc:

 

[ban-all-sheds]

It will be connected to the consumer unit by a qualified electrician once i have run all the new cables through the trunking etc:

Then ask him.

And ask him about the route, and the installation method.

And agree with him how much of the work he is happy for you to do.

He is the one who will have to sign this:

I being the person responsible for the design, construction, inspection & testing of the electrical installation (as indicated by my signature below), particulars of which are described above, having exercised reasonable skill and care when carrying out the design, construction, inspection & testing hereby CERTIFY that the said work for which I have been responsible is to the best of my knowledge and belief in accordance with BS 7671:2008, amended to 2015 except for the departures, if any, detailed as follows:​

He is the one who will have to tell Building Control that he did the work and it complied with the Building Regulations.

If you do the design, and you install the cables, how can you expect the electrician to say he did those things?

 

[bernardgreen]

I being the person responsible for the design, construction,

I being the person responsible for the design, construction

but not

I being the person who performed the design, construction

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I'm sure that you can think of a good reason for trying that failed-so-often-that-it-is-now-utterly-discredited argument yet again.

I'm equally sure that nobody else can.

But I'll play along.

I'll ask you to put forward a convincing explanation of how a professional with no formal control of, or supervisory relationship with, another person can take responsibility¹ for what that other person has done and has presented to them as a fait accompli.

¹ With all that that entails - legal responsibility wrt Building Regulations, responsibility wrt PLI/PII terms & conditions, responsibility for complying with the rules of NICEIC/NAPIT/ELECSA/etc, being perfectly happy, no matter what happens, to swear on oath in a court of law that "yes I was responsible for that work".

 

[bernardgreen]

But I'll play along.

Then play along with this....

A team of four electricians re-wire a house. Which one signs the document, or does each one sign for the work they did as an individual meaning there are four certificates for installation and a possible fifth for the design work.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Straight away you are positing a materially different scenario.

"A team of four electricians re-wire a house"

The OP is not an electrician.

"A team of four electricians re-wire a house"

So there is a formal relationship between them, or with someone else in common.

There is no such relationship between the OP and any electrician who comes along after he's chosen a cable and installed it. He and the electrician are not a team.

Which one signs the document, or does each one sign for the work they did as an individual meaning there are four certificates for installation and a possible fifth for the design work.

If they were 4 individual self-employed OMB electricians who had never even seen each other before, and who each went off and did their own thing on their part of the rewire, and never discussed anything with any of the others, which one do you suggest should sign a document to say he took responsibility for the work of the other 3?

 

[bernardgreen]

Straight away you are positing a materially different scenario.

If the electrician is happy that the DIYer did the work to a satisfactory standard then in the same way as one electrician can be responsible for the work carried out by all members of a team then he can be responsible for the work the DIYer carried out.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Bernard - you are not going to get away with that.

You DID posit a materially different scenario. The OP is NOT an electrician. So straight away (again) you're conflating the two types of people. Straight away (again) you're saying that an electrician being responsible for the work of other electricians who he works alongside is the same as him being responsible for the work of an unqualified person which was done and dusted before he arrived on the scene.

An electrician turning up after the event, and agreeing to say that he was responsible for the choice of the cable (when he had never even heard of the DIYer at the time it was chosen), and that he was responsible for its installation (when he had never even heard of the DIYer at the time it was installed) is NOT the same as a group of electricians working in a team.

Remember what "responsible" means. It means accepting full liability for everything to do with the design and installation. It means agreeing to be the one who has to pay compensation if a loss occurs because of flaws in the design or installation. It means agreeing to be the one who is prosecuted if any laws were broken in the design or installation. It means agreeing to have your professional reputation stand or fall on the soundness of design and installation work done by an amateur who you had never even heard of before he asks you to say that you were responsible for the soundness of design and installation work done by him.

Will you please answer this:

If this group of electricians were individual self-employed OMB tradesmen who had never even seen each other before, and who each went off and did their own thing on their part of the rewire, and never discussed anything with any of the others, which one do you suggest should sign a document to say he took responsibility for the work of all the others?​

 

[bernardgreen]

Will you please answer this:

No I will not because all you are doing is to deny something that happens in real life in order to give yourself a reason to be posting on this forum.

 

[SimonH2]

I'm sure that you can think of a good reason for trying that failed-so-often-that-it-is-now-utterly-discredited argument yet again.

Being pedantic, you are the one in the wrong here. You stated :

He is the one who will have to tell Building Control that he did the work ...

You are normally very ready to pick on anyone making sloppy mistakes like that. Yet here you are, again, trying to make someone else wrong for the fact that you conflated "being responsible for" and "having done" the work.

Also being pedantic, assuming that the sparky is a member of an approved body then they don't even tell BC about it - they inform their membership scheme. And for good measure, you are also overlooking the possibility that the OP is using the BC notification route ... yeah, I doubt it as well

Bt I don't disagree with the general advice - the OP needs to work with his sparky.

 

[Taylortwocities]

 

[ericmark]

running through wall mounted plastic trunking

So any one can inspect, so simple answer yes 2.5 mm² is fine, and even if the person responsible did not agree not that much work to change it, or reduce the MCB/RCBO to 20 amp.

2.5 mm² is standard size for a ring final.

As to one person signing, there is nothing to stop using electricians mates, and apprentices as well as fully qualified electricians, all it needs is for the person signing the paperwork to be in charge of the work.

 

[OwainDIYer]

If they were 4 individual self-employed OMB electricians who had never even seen each other before, and who each went off and did their own thing on their part of the rewire, and never discussed anything with any of the others, which one do you suggest should sign a document to say he took responsibility for the work of the other 3?

The one back in the office wearing the nicest suit and NICEIC tie who's never met any of the electricians and never been to the job site. But it'll comply with Part Pee. As long as no-one dies he'll probabloy get away with it.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

No I will not because all you are doing is to deny something that happens in real life in order to give yourself a reason to be posting on this forum.

I don't know how many people you expect will believe that that really is the reason you will not answer the question.

For the avoidance of any doubt, the one sitting here typing this knows full well that what you have said there is a deliberate untruth.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

You are normally very ready to pick on anyone making sloppy mistakes like that. Yet here you are, again, trying to make someone else wrong for the fact that you conflated "being responsible for" and "having done" the work.

Oh dear.

Do you care about the fact that the Building Regulations do not use the term "responsible for", but instead use variations of "carrying out"?

Also being pedantic, assuming that the sparky is a member of an approved body then they don't even tell BC about it - they inform their membership scheme.

Try reading the Building Regulations, for once in your life.

The person who carries out the work is required to notify the local authority. That he may use an administrative process put in place for him by the trade body to whom he pays a fee to provide him with various services is irrelevant, he is still certifying the correctness of the work which he carried out.