New 17th edition amendment 3 consumer unit - metal or plastic?

[JohnW2]

Thanks for all the comments, this thread has got a bit technical for me now! But it seems the consensus is I do need a new consumer unit as want an electrical shower fitted, and if want to keep up with regulations coming into place from 1 January 2016 should consider getting a metal CU?

I think that's probably right. If you do need a new CU (for reasons other than the material it is made of), then it makes sense to get one which is going to be compliant with the current regulations come next January. Unfortunately, as per the 'technical' discussion here, I think that almost certainly means that you'll be stuck with a metal one, since I don't think you (or, rather, your electrician) will be able to find a plastic one which claims to be compliant with the new regulation.

Another quick questions...one quote I received said: To supply a satisfactory NICEIC certificate with Part P council notification. £90.00. That seems a lot to me and research online seems to say this should be included. When I questioned what the charge for the certificate was for he added 'The advantage of the certificate if that if you want to rent the property in the next 5 years you have it in place, if you are going to live there then there is not a great advantage to having the certificate to be honest.' Still, should I be paying for this if we do plan to rent in the future and if so, £90 seems a lot or is that standard?

You are right to be concerned. The "Part P council notification" is not optional. Replacing a CU is 'notifiable work' and if your electrician does that without notifying it, he will have broken the law, and left you in a potentially difficult position. He therefore should not be implying that not notifying the work would be a (legal) option. As for the charge, it could just be that he is being 'too honest'. As you say, there would not usually be a separate charge for this. However, dealing with the paperwork etc. takes a little time, so I presume that most electricians 'build that in' to their quotation/estimate without mentioning that trhey have done that - but maybe he hasn't. I would have thought that it's unlikely to be anything like £90's work, anyway. Your best option would really be to get one or two other estimates/quotes and see how they compare the the present one (with and without the £90 added).

Kind Regards, John

 

[ElliotW]

Thanks for all the comments, this thread has got a bit technical for me now! But it seems the consensus is I do need a new consumer unit as want an electrical shower fitted, and if want to keep up with regulations coming into place from 1 January 2016 should consider getting a metal CU?

I think that's probably right. If you do need a new CU (for reasons other than the material it is made of), then it makes sense to get one which is going to be compliant with the current regulations come next January. Unfortunately, as per the 'technical' discussion here, I think that almost certainly means that you'll be stuck with a metal one, since I don't think you (or, rather, your electrician) will be able to find a plastic one which claims to be compliant with the new regulation.

Another quick questions...one quote I received said: To supply a satisfactory NICEIC certificate with Part P council notification. £90.00. That seems a lot to me and research online seems to say this should be included. When I questioned what the charge for the certificate was for he added 'The advantage of the certificate if that if you want to rent the property in the next 5 years you have it in place, if you are going to live there then there is not a great advantage to having the certificate to be honest.' Still, should I be paying for this if we do plan to rent in the future and if so, £90 seems a lot or is that standard?

You are right to be concerned. The "Part P council notification" is not optional. Replacing a CU is 'notifiable work' and if your electrician does that without notifying it, he will have broken the law, and left you in a potentially difficult position. He therefore should not be implying that not notifying the work would be a (legal) option. As for the charge, it could just be that he is being 'too honest'. As you say, there would not usually be a separate charge for this. However, dealing with the paperwork etc. takes a little time, so I presume that most electricians 'build that in' to their quotation/estimate without mentioning that trhey have done that - but maybe he hasn't. I would have thought that it's unlikely to be anything like £90's work, anyway. Your best option would really be to get one or two other estimates/quotes and see how they compare the the present one (with and without the £90 added).

Kind Regards, John

Hi John, thanks for this, very useful!

 

[EFLImpudence]

Another quick questions...one quote I received said: To supply a satisfactory NICEIC certificate with Part P council notification. £90.00. That seems a lot to me and research online seems to say this should be included.

It should. That bit is actually a legal requirement.

When I questioned what the charge for the certificate was for he added 'The advantage of the certificate if that if you want to rent the property in the next 5 years you have it in place, if you are going to live there then there is not a great advantage to having the certificate to be honest.'

It has to be done - even if you throw it away as soon as you get it.

Still, should I be paying for this

Not separately.

if we do plan to rent in the future

You will need it if you are going to rent.

and if so, £90 seems a lot or is that standard?

I suppose it depends on the total cost.
It must be supplied and notified to the Local Authority.



I think you should find someone else to do the work.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I was slow.

 

[JohnW2]

I was slow.

It's good to see someone other than myself being slow for once

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

But it seems the consensus is I do need a new consumer unit as want an electrical shower fitted,

If you want an electric shower it could be done without replacing the CU. Although it is rather old, and there are good reasons for having it replaced. Not being metal is not one of them. Ironically, if you do replace it you will end up with one with internals which are poorly engineered compared to yours, and prone to the overheating/catching fire problem which has led the idiots who write the Wiring Regulations to do what they have done.

and if want to keep up with regulations coming into place from 1 January 2016 should consider getting a metal CU?

Do you want a metal one?

Another quick questions...one quote I received said: To supply a satisfactory NICEIC certificate with Part P council notification. £90.00. That seems a lot to me and research online seems to say this should be included.

It's not optional. To not do that certification is a criminal offence. (Not that anybody ever has, or probably ever will, be prosecuted for committing it).

When I questioned what the charge for the certificate was for he added 'The advantage of the certificate if that if you want to rent the property in the next 5 years you have it in place, if you are going to live there then there is not a great advantage to having the certificate to be honest.' Still, should I be paying for this if we do plan to rent in the future and if so, £90 seems a lot or is that standard?

Report them to NICEIC - they will, I hope, be interested to learn that one of their members is telling people that they have to pay an extra charge for them to comply with the law. And have nothing to do with the electrician(s) who offered that "option".

 

[JohnW2]

Do you want a metal one?

I think that's probably an unfair question. The OP has indicated, at least by implication, that what he wants is a CU which will be generally accepted as compliant with the regulations which will be current next year. As I have indicated to him, although I feel it's probably unfortunate, as things stand that effectively means that he would have to have a metal one.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If he has a plastic one installed in the next couple of months that will be absolutely fine. Fair enough if he doesn't care one way or another then have a metal one now, but if he does care then a plastic one can be installed now, and any electrician who refuses to do that is probably not to be trusted.

 

[JohnW2]

If he has a plastic one installed in the next couple of months that will be absolutely fine. Fair enough if he doesn't care one way or another then have a metal one now, but if he does care then a plastic one can be installed now...

Sure, and I think the OP understands all that. However, as I said, he appears to have made it clear that his view is that, if the CU is to be replaced' (for other reasons) before the end of this year, it 'would make sense' to replace it with one which would be generally accepted as complying with the regulation that will come into force in a couple of months' time, even though he understands (I think) that there isn't (and never will be) any regulatory requirement to bring a pre-1.1.16 CU up to the requirements of future regulations.

Kind Regards, John

 

[securespark]

Sealing round the cable entry points is nothing new.

For what purpose (if the CU were 'combustible') - and are you suggesting that there is (or has been) a regulatory requirement to do this?

Nothing to do with the flammability, just to make the enclosure IP compliant.

 

[JohnW2]

Nothing to do with the flammability, just to make the enclosure IP compliant.

Oh, I see. Sure, there is nothing new about that (particularly with top knock-outs) - but it is, of course, very different from what we've been talking about in this thread.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The English language is often ambiguous - does it mean "(abnormal heat) and fire" or "abnormal (heat and fire)". I actually suspect the former.

I would say the latter, and would prefer "abnormal heat or fire" to express the former. When I get a moment I'll see if Mr Gowers has anything to say on the subject.

I can find nothing in the Complete Plain Words on the matter

What I'd really prefer, and were I able to, insist upon, would be "fire or abnormal heat" to express the former.

I agree. That cannot really be regarded as ambiguous.

So, I suspect, would EG