Part P Question

[andycase007]

Hi
Was at work today pondering over some work i am having done, and cam eup with a question i want to ask you. Please dont take this the wrong way, i am not picking fault with Part P or current regs, i will always strive to do things the right way and i also believe in using good tradesman where possible.
BUT, as i understand it, if i have a double socket on a ring main in my dining room, i, as the home owner and someone who is familiar with simple electrical proceedures, could spur off that with 2.5mm T&E, in some 25x16 trunking along the wall (not that i would because of asthetics), and install another socket in the opposite corner of the room? Yes?

However, on the other side of that wall, literally one bricks depth, is my garden. I, as the home owner, couldn't drill through that wall and install a weather proof socket there instead of the internal one described above? That is contravening Part P etc.

What is the difference between these 2 scenarios that i am missing? If it really is the case, would it not be better for all electrical work, from replacing a socket anywhere in the house to running a spur etc, to be covered by Part P and requiring a fully qualified electrician?

I really am not trying to start a row here, or buck against the law, i am genuinely interested in why the change as described above? Or am i totally wrong and not even the house holder can spur inside his house now? Perhaps my thoughts are outdated?

 

[SparkyNinja]

look up 'special locations', gardens are treated in a similar respect.

 

[flameport]

The inside socket isn't notifiable, the outside one is.
Anyone could install either, but the outside one would require payment of a fee to building control before it was installed.

As for reasons - supposedly because electrical items outside, in kitchens and bathrooms are more dangerous than the same items installed elsewhere.

In reality, vast amounts of notificable electrical work is done with no notification at all, almost no one is prosecuted or fined for breaking the law, and the entire system is a mess.

 

[SparkyNinja]

supposedly because electrical items outside, in kitchens and bathrooms are more dangerous than the same items installed elsewhere.

Well... they are.

 

[andycase007]

Hi Widdler
I know that gardens are a "special location" and can completely understand if as a home owner i wanted to run cable underground in the garden, or put electrics into my shed etc. But, a socket in exactly the same place, but simply through the wall - thats what i am struggling with?
I will always obey, maybe thats conformist, but i just dont understand the reasoning behind it.

 

[SparkyNinja]

It's because of the extra concern and precautions you should be aware of. Inside your house your standing on your carpet and fault current will likely go through the cpc as it should in the event of a fault. Whilst a fault occuring on something installed outside can result in the fault current choosing you as the quicker earth fault return path due to the fact that it is deemed likely that you may be in contact with the general mass of earth.

 

[andycase007]

Widdler, Now thats a good answer - it totally makes sense and was something i hadnt thought of. Clear and precise. Nice one, thanks.

 

[ColJack]

there's also aspects of the external socket that need to be adhered to ( and consequently checked ) that might not apply to an indoor socket.
it needs to be of the correct IP rating, and it needs to be RCD protected ( which the inside might not if you mark it up as "TV only" etc.. but the outside socket is definitely for use with outdoor portable equipment ).

 

[Stoday]

On the other hand, if you connect to equipment attached to the outside wall instead of a socket, you don't have to notify.

So you can wire to an outside security light or an air conditioning unit for example, without notification, provided they are attached to the outside wall. And, of course, it's not a new circuit and it doesn't involve work in a kitchen.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Can you?

Where in Schedule 2B are there exemptions for those?

 

[Paul_C]

If you try long enough to find any logic behind notifiable vs. non-notifiable jobs you'll end up going crazy, because the whole thing is just a bureaucratic mess.

To take but one other example: You might want to add a single socket on the wall for something right below the distribution panel. If you run your cable up to the panel and connect it as a spur to an existing ring, then it's an extension to an existing circuit and not notifiable (assuming not in a special location etc.). But if you decide that socket needs to be on its own circuit for some reason, run the exact same cable to the board, and then connect to a newly added MCB, it's notifiable.

 

[ColJack]

and?
if it's onto an existing socket circuit then that has been designed and chosen as being compliant with the regs
if it's onto a new MCB then for all the DIYer doing it knows, that spare 40A is fine to connect it to..

 

[Spark123]

Hi Widdler
I know that gardens are a "special location"....

A garden isn't a "special location". An electrical power installation in a garden is a "special installation", might seem pedantic but with respect to part p the two are defined differently.

 

[Paul_C]

if it's onto an existing socket circuit then that has been designed and chosen as being compliant with the regs
if it's onto a new MCB then for all the DIYer doing it knows, that spare 40A is fine to connect it to..

So if the DIYer isn't supposed to know that, then how is he supposed to know not to use 1.0 sq. mm. for a spur from a 30A ring?

 

[ColJack]

they aren't but odds are they'll get to the point of connection to the ring and realise there's a big missmatch in the size of the wiring he's used and the size already there..
if connecting to an empty MCB then there's no such direct comparison available, only indirect by looking at the cable sizes in the oter MCB's..