The kitchen fitters started fitting our new kitchen today, I have had all the electrical prep work done, but I'm at work while they are here,
just swmbo in.
The fitters took out the old kitchen, but whilst extending a water pipe hole they nicked an electric cable in the wall.
Their solution was to cut out the damaged bit of cable, and from what my wife has said, crimp a new bit in with what look like those cheapo pre
insulated car crimps, finished off with a wrap of tape.
Surely this can't meet part p regs or whatever is relavent? can anyone confirm??
Add to that the poxy plastic push fits they've used on copper, they can get ready for an early phone call from a pissed off customer.
Wrong wrong wrong, the cable should be replaced or a proper joint made with all cores of the cable not just the damaged one, the connection they have made for the repair will give you problems in the future.
Relevant standard would be the 17th edition of the IEE Regulations.
Somehow I don't think that 'repair' makes it. I wouldn't accept it personally.
The cable bodge is 100% wrong but the plastic fittings are ok, being used more and more these days.
Thanks guys, I was 99.999% sure it is wrong.
I know the plastic fittings are getting common, but both these are straights, and the pipes going in and out are at slight angles, obviously forced
in, and I'll lay money on a future leak.... They've used solder ring everywhere else, these were just a bit awkward to clean.
They're not getting over the doorstep tomorrow until I've spoken to the company owner......
[Edited on 9/2/10 by r1_pete]
that repair is actually fine, if the finished product is heat shrunk. Crimps are allowed to be inaccessible, screwed connections must remain
accessible. Tape isnt allowed as it can be removed without a tool hence doesnt count as a second layer of insulation - heat shrink is fine.
Now you may think you have paid enough for your kitchen that you deserve a 'proper' fix by having the cable replaced anyway, and this may
well be so. However if you google the crimp and heatshrink technique, the consensus is that its well within the regs, even if its not to the standard
you expect.
the plastic plumbing fittings are sadly on the increase due to speed and simplicity. I dont use them myself, but by all accounts they are reliable these days. Fitters like them as they go onto wet pipes fine, are fast, and the better ones can be removed and reused if you forgot something. I was actually thinking about them earlier, trying to weigh the cost of my time vs the extra cost of the fittings, and its a close call really.
Thanks, its definately tape.......
Image deleted by owner
^^^^^yep Joel is 100% correct!
That tape looks nasty! Having just reqired the upstairs on my house (with qualified sparky mate, I hasten to add!), we ripped everything out and
started afresh. There were junction blocks galore, that i'm not a fan of, but nothing that bad!
There looks to be a decent amount of slack in the cable - I'd personally just repair using a junction block. Just my 2p's worth, though!
The main problem with the tape is it isn't waterproof if one of those pipes leaks.
Heatshrink would be ok, but not as good as having it replaced.
The pipe joints look like JG Speedfit to me the best you can buy and completely reliable. Some of the cheapo ones (Screwfix own brand) blow off copper
pipe but never had a problem with the Speedfit.
With regards to the electrical repair I'd report it to their regulator if they are a member of a Part P scheme (which they should be) and see
what they think.
Hi, just adding my 2 pence worth.
The idea of adding a junction box is not so good. If one is put in, there must be access to it.
Secondly, as refering to the comment of a joint near those water pipes, unless the box was ip65 rated, it would be at risk of the joints getting
wet
Len.
If they were just fitters I doubt they would be Part P certified and so they shouldn't have touched it.
As AndyHarding said just tell them your going to check with the building inspector to make sure it's ok. If it is & they were qualified to do
it then everyones happy, if not they'll have to explain it to the inspector.
If they do that sort of thing, the chances are they will try to cut corners else where. Personally I would F***K them off right now and give my money to someone else. I have had the cowboys before and never again.
Its 2 or 3 mts of twin and earth just haul the damaged bit out and put a new bit in.
Shit like that happens all the time....if you start fighting with them you will only get their backs up and you will get a lousy job.......
Been on both sides....contractor and client.....customer used to get half the fixings if we dint get offered a cuppa...and lord help em if we got
plain chocolate free biscuits.....used to tell them the dogs licked all the chocolate off and they would apologise and get some proper ones.
Wife sold kitchens both here and SA and the number of things that could go wrong is incredible....
just get a piece of twin and earth and pull it in to the ring........not a biggie.....
shouting off is like complaining in a resturant.....they wont tell you when the make another mistake and that could be something like a screw into a
pipe ect that could leak later...
Wow...those last 2 posts are polar opposite....Mango - while I understand what you're saying, if they bodge something, there's no pride
(probably wrong word - too much beer) in their work. If there's no pride, then I'd agree - where else will they cut corners?
Personally, I'd just have quiet word, and say while I appreciate they've put a temporary fix in to overcome the immediate problem, what are
they going to do as a permanent repair.
Depending on the outcome of that conversation would depend whether I'd side with Mango or Thinking
[Edited on 10/2/10 by stevebubs]
PS an alternative tack to take would be to get a sparky to look at it on the Q.T. and if he's unhappy, get him to fix it and hit them with his bill once the kitchen is finished.
quote:
shouting off is like complaining in a resturant.....they wont tell you when the make another mistake and that could be something like a screw into a pipe ect that could leak later...
Yup, you can't add a junction box because it's not accesible. Hidden junction boxes are a no-no as I suppose the thinking is they're
more liable to break.
Then again, when did the building regs actually make sense e.g.
Now all non-protected wires hidden in walls (e.g. under plaster) have to have a MCB on that circuit. So you have to have a split consumer unit to
comply with 17th edition regs. But that still means if a socket trips the MCB you're going to lose some lights.
More people get injured falling down stairs / tripping over when the lighting circuit goes (ie trying to get to the CU in the dark) than by being
electrocuted from a lighting circuit not on a MCB...... Which is why you always had the lighting on the unprotected bit of the split CU, now you have
to have two MCBs...
As said a word on the QT should do the job. Part P is a bloody joke and it does not make people competent.
If you get the time i'd do the whole lot myself as then at least you know its been done properly.
quote:
Originally posted by BenB
Yup, you can't add a junction box because it's not accesible. Hidden junction boxes are a no-no as I suppose the thinking is they're more liable to break.
Then again, when did the building regs actually make sense e.g.
Now all non-protected wires hidden in walls (e.g. under plaster) have to have a MCB on that circuit. So you have to have a split consumer unit to comply with 17th edition regs. But that still means if a socket trips the MCB you're going to lose some lights.
More people get injured falling down stairs / tripping over when the lighting circuit goes (ie trying to get to the CU in the dark) than by being electrocuted from a lighting circuit not on a MCB...... Which is why you always had the lighting on the unprotected bit of the split CU, now you have to have two MCBs...
Just to clarify 17th edition these new twin rcd consumer units are not actually compliant. Looks like lots are being fitted as they are cheaper and being claimed as 17th edition but the only true way to achieve compliance with 17th edition is to have a RCBO on every single circuit. IMHO this is the *best* way to do it anyway to avoid nuisance tripping but certainly not the cheapest.
Thanks for all the advice chaps, will be having a word as soon as the office opens at 10.00, I'm feeling a bit more rational now.
They are supposed to be a high end company, the units and fittings are top notch, but if the 'fundementals' are botched, its best part of
£15K down the gurgler....
Cheers.
Pete.
what company is it pete? If you dont mind me asking.
quote:
Originally posted by andyharding
Just to clarify 17th edition these new twin rcd consumer units are not actually compliant. Looks like lots are being fitted as they are cheaper and being claimed as 17th edition but the only true way to achieve compliance with 17th edition is to have a RCBO on every single circuit. IMHO this is the *best* way to do it anyway to avoid nuisance tripping but certainly not the cheapest.
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
Basically a fault on one circuit isnt meant to affect the operation of any other circuit; having circuits grouped onto rcds doesnt comply with this.
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
what company is it pete? If you dont mind me asking.