Socket connected to lighting ring - get rid or OK to label as 5A?

[ban-all-sheds]

Well, it would IF the OP's lighting circuit were RCD-protected (which he says it isn't).

Given what he says about L & N from differet circuits, nor is the socket circuit...

 

[JohnW2]

Given what he says about L & N from differet circuits, nor is the socket circuit...

Indeed.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Aren't people confusing different posters?

 

[JohnW2]

Aren't people confusing different posters?

Whoops - yes, at least two of us are (one 'tempted' into that mistake by the other ), at least as far as the neutral is concerned. The actual OP seems to have vanished.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Jonw2, read what I said and don't fill in non existant blanks, because I don't know what you are talking about.

I not only read what you wrote, but actually quoted what you had written in connection with each of my responses. Let's try again, with some comments you might find clearer....

Its not appropriate to have non rcd protected s/o for external use.

Agreed.

As the s/o is for external use, it is more likely to be effected by moisture and consequent nuisance tripping of your lighting circuit, which in your case means the loss of all the lighting.

Assuming that you're talking about the topic of this thread, as per the initial post, then there is no RCD, so there is nothing to trip in response to moisture - it's all but impossible that moisture (or even a socket full of water) could cause an MCB to trip (or a fuse to blow).

I would replace the s/o with an rcd s/o, this will effectively separate internal and external problems.

Again, I assume that you are talking about the topic of the thread - i.e. with no RCD protection of the lighting circuit. Whilst that remains the case, there is (as above) no need to 'separate internal and external problems'. If the OP did install an RCD to protect the lighting circuit then, as I said, if he then installed a second RCD (in an RCD socket) that would provide no guarantee of 'separation of internal and external problems' - the internal RCD might still trip as a result of moisture causing an 'external problem'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[AndyPRK]

If the OP wishes to use this socket for xmas lights, then these days, they have to be low voltage, and would typically have a wall wart plugged into the socket.

So if the socket is high up, I can't see the need to rush out and get an RCD socket. Regulations aren't retrospective

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If the OP wishes to use this socket for xmas lights, then these days, they have to be low voltage, and would typically have a wall wart plugged into the socket.

Duck!

 

[AndyPRK]

Sorry. Elv.

 

[JohnW2]

Sorry. Elv.

Worry ye not - as we've discovered, according to the IEC definition, "ELV" is "Low Voltage"

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The problem is that LV is not ELV

 

[mattylad]

They are both "low voltage" as it's in their name - its just that one is lower than the other

 

[JohnW2]

The problem is that LV is not ELV

Fortunately, it appears that it IS in the minds of virtually all consumers. I'm pretty sure that I have never heard an 'ordinary person' (unrelated/non-connected with the electrical industry etc.) referring to a voltage over 200V as "low voltage" - and (even more fortunately, in my opinion) nor have I ever seen a consumer product intended for use with 200V+ 'mains electricity' described as "low voltage".

 

[winston1]

As JohnD says, it is acceptable and is specifically stated as such in The wiring Regulations.
Do ignore Winston’s post. He has personal opinions on this (and other subjects) that he keeps pushing. In his opinion it’s bad practise, well it isn’t.
We have encouraged him to join the committee that writes the wiring regulations and have the rules changed, but he resists our suggestions, in favour of bleating on and on and on about this.

I am entitled to my opinion, you are entitled to yours, but you have no right to tell people to ignore me.

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

I am entitled to my opinion, you are entitled to yours, but you have no right to tell people to ignore me.

He has exactly as much right to tell people to do that as you do to spout your nonsense. Whose particular legal system are you invoking?

 

[winston1]

OP, apart from what I said about it being bad practice to have a 13 a socket on the lighting circuit it appears this socket is hanging down on a cable from the ceiling. This a complete bodge as well and needs sorting out.
Also note lighting circuits are not wired as rings.