Shop/Flat CU palcements

[New2Game]

Should a shop which has a flat above have both CUs in the shop fed from 1 main fuse, but with two meters and two boards?
I think that it would be against regs as what if needed to isolate circuit when shop was closed? What if mcb tripped out how could turn back on?
Opinions appreciated!

 

[ColJack]

flat should have it's own meter and board.. with it's own cutout..

usual way is to take a "feed" from the incoming to the shop.. piggybacking the flat off it..

 

[New2Game]

should the Flat Cu be in the flat and accessible though??? Its in shops at minute

 

[Pensdown]

If the flat is privately owned the CU etc should be either in the flat or accessible to the owner.

However, if the flat is owned by the same person as the shop (and then sub-let) it's up to the owners where they put the flat CU.

 

[plugwash]

I would certainly be concerned about lack of access to my own CU if I took on a place to rent.

 

[bernardgreen]

should the Flat Cu be in the flat and accessible though??? Its in shops at minute

Common sense and basic safety says the consumer unit should be accessible at any time there is someone in the flat. The need to isolate a circut when a socket is damaged or to reset the lighting MCB after a bulb blows are reason for easy access to the CU. And phoning the owner to come and let you into the shop is NOT easy access.

 

[Pensdown]

Common sense and basic safety says the consumer unit should be accessible at any time there is someone in the flat.

That might be true if all tenants were as trustworthy as you and plug but sadly that's not always the case.

Flats above shops are generally short term lets and quite a few landlords deliberately keep the meter and CU out of the flat in an attempt to stop the tenants fiddling the meter and caring out un-authorised modifications/repairs.

If the CU was in the flat, I wonder what a short term tenant (often with very little money) would do if they accidentally damaged a socket or hit a cable when trying to hang a picture.

a. Call the landlord and end up paying for a sparks to repair it properly?
b. Call out a sparks themselves?
b. Bodge the repair, reset the circuit and say nothing?

 

[Adam_151]

Interesting point, I suppose if the tenant always had a number to call for someone to reset protective devices, and the installation minimised this happening (eg. C6 breakers on lighting, etc)

I'd still worry about isolation of something got broken though, or someone receieved a shock, perhaps a big red button by the front door that drops out a contactor, a la workshop style ... just have to hope the tenant doesn't have kids...

 

[Pensdown]

I think some landlords would go for the big red button if it blew up or evicted some of their DSS tenants

 

[jwilliams]

I had the pleasure of renting a property some years ago which had been annexed from a larger one by Bodgit the Builder who owned the place. I believe that it was all running from a single CU and meter, as the electricity bill had to be included in the rent at a fixed rate.

It was a right bugger when the MCB for the lighting circuit tripped when a bulb blew on a Friday night when the other property was 'between tenants', and the emergency contact mobile numbers were ignored until Monday morning.

The landlord was messing us around at the time ("Please move out on the 23rd December so I can sell the place." He had £950 of our money as a deposit, which meant we couldn't afford the deposit on another place. Refused to allow us to move out a month earlier when we could have crashed elsewhere. Arse.)
I called the local council's building control department and asked whether the CU situation was allowable. Although no definitive answer was given, the gentleman I spoke to was rather interested to discover the complete lack of planning permission and BCO involvement in the project