nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

House Rewire - DIY first-fix?

GreeBo

Hey,

what are the options/implications of doing a DIY rewire but only up to first-fox/running the wires?

I need to get a new DB but also the house would benefit from a rewire.
However I cant get anyone to even quote for it as running the cables will be awkward (lots of chasing, tiles etc, existing sockets on skirting boards)

So, is it permissible/advisable/a thing to run the wires myself and then have a RECI do the second fix?

Assuming it would pass certification, are there any issues with this approach?

Cheers!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

TheChizler

2011 wrote: »

Rare I would think.

I’m no legal expert but I would think that once you start installing the cable it you are doing something illegal. The fact that the cable is dead changes nothing, the fact remains that this is restricted electrical work. You can disagree with it as I do but that is the law.

As per my last post. Electrical work that is not minor works in a domestic installation.

See above.

Not disagreeing just trying to understand. The difference just seems subjective to me.

2011

TheChizler wrote: »

Yes but I'm wondering what makes something electrical work, say if a cable isn't connected how could that be electrical work?

Even a child knows that that is a fundamental part of electrical work.
Do you honestly think you could get away with a statement like that in court?
Seriously????

That’s would go down as the worst defense in court history.

You have the answer. Not liking the answer won’t change it.

Padre_Pio

It's not subjective. Anyone with half a brain who took a look at the work you did will tell you it's illegal.

You just want it to be subjective to save a few euro, but it'll bite you in the long run.

TheChizler

2011 wrote: »

Even a child knows thy that is a fundamental part of electrical work.
Do you honestly think you could get away with a statement like that in court?
Seriously????
That’s would go down as the worst defense in court history.

You have the answer. Not liking the answer won’t change it.

Here since when am I trying to get away with anything or change an answer? I'm trying to understand, I have no intention of ever doing that kind of work myself or encouraging anyone to do it. If the law says it's illegal it's illegal. What I'd like is a clear definition of what exactly is illegal as it seems ambiguous at best to me and I thought it was an interesting theoretical question to discuss, on a discussion board.

Maybe the law says you cannot run a cable for the purposes of carrying mains current from a distribution board to a final circuit, but I've never read the law and I was hoping an expert could provide some information. I'm sorry you think I'm arguing or trying to get away with anything.

2011

Like I said I am not a legal expert.

Laws are not always clearly written, I know this better than most because I am a keen shooter and firearms legalization is very poorly written.

However this is relatively simple because minor works is very clearly defined. So in a domestic installation if the electrical work is not minor it is illegal. One judge may take a slightly different view to another but that is pretty much it. If you want considered legal opinion this is the wrong forum.

In my opinion;
Will you get caught? Unlikely
If caught will you go to jai? Unlikely
Will a good REC finish your 1st fix? Unlikely

Bruthal

2011 wrote: »

Even a child knows that that is a fundamental part of electrical work.
Do you honestly think you could get away with a statement like that in court?
Seriously????
That’s would go down as the worst defense in court history.

You have the answer. Not liking the answer won’t change it.

Its a fair question. What if he runs a single cable for a socket. Or a heating stat. Or a few stats. Or 2 sockets. He did ask when does running a cable become illegal, or what decides it is.

We know.. minor works etc. But run 1 cable for a socket, or 1 for an. Immersion....

Most of these type laws that are revenue based are similarly vague at times. TV licence being another. They don't care if it only works in China, they still want your money.

2011

Bruthal wrote: »

He did ask when does running a cable become illegal, or what decides it is.

Who decides? Ultimately a judge in the unlikely event that you end up in front of one.

Bruthal

2011 wrote: »

Who decides? Ultimately a judge in the unlikely event that you end up in front of one.

Would be interesting being in front of a judge after using a length of t&e as an extension lead. Or wiring an extra socket.

So it was a fair question. If someone runs a t&e across a room under the floors, both ends coming up at boxes, when is it illegal.......

Its not a clear answer

EHP

Bruthal wrote: »

Would be interesting being in front of a judge after using a length of t&e as an extension lead. Or wiring an extra socket.

So it was a fair question. If someone runs a t&e across a room under the floors, both ends coming up at boxes, when is it illegal.......

Its not a clear answer

If someone runs a t/e across a floor from one socket to an extra socket on the same circuit that is minor works and not illegal.

If they run from the fuse board and connect up on the board that is illegal as this is restricted works

If a non REC runs cable for the first fix it is not illegal until someone puts power to it if you want cable running around the house with no power in it work away no issue there.

If the op first fixes the house a REC cannot certify that work and therefore legally can't connect to it if he does he is breaking the law.

I think the op is suggesting he runs the cable and the REC threats it like an existing installation where he only certifys the second fix this essentially would be illegal works also.

The best the op can do is empty the house completely lift all carpets/floor boards cut all chases and offer to be there during the first fix to help pull cable but be prepared to be told not to be there. The worst part of a rewire is working around furniture etc.

2011

Bruthal wrote: »

Would be interesting being in front of a judge after using a length of t&e as an extension lead. Or wiring an extra socket.

I guess that the prosecution would have to be able to demonstrate that the extension lead was part of a domestic wiring system. It would be down to legal argument, so not my area.

So it was a fair question. If someone runs a t&e across a room under the floors, both ends coming up at boxes, when is it illegal.......

I am more technical than legal, but there are lots of grey areas. Different judges will take different views. Why should we expect all of the laws relating to wiring to be black and white when they aren't for so many other ares in our society?

Example: If you buy an airsoft gun in a shop and the maximum energy it can fire a projectile at is no more than one joule (as is normally the case) it is legally a toy as such no firearms license is required. If the projectile can be propelled at greater than 1 joule a firearms license is required as it is now defined as a firearm from a legal perspective. So by law in Ireland you need a firearms license for all nail guns, go figure

Ever hear of anyone being prosecuted for having an unlicensed nail gun? No? I thought not...

Just because something is illegal in terms of restricted electrical works doesn't mean that there are any consequences to breaking that law.

Example: I would think that all of the Sky satellite installers are breaking the law by installing TV points, as are intruder alarm installers by wiring alarm sensors.

What if I run a HDMI lead to my TV? There is an electrical signal on it and it is chased into the wall so it is part of the installation. Technically I would think that this is illegal. Do I think anyone would ever face prosecution for this? Not a chance.

But if someone were to first fix an entire installation I think this would be a bridge too far in the mind of a judge. I also think there is a risk of prosecution if reported. I also believe that any REC involved in this sort of scam could be in real trouble.

GreeBo

EHP wrote: »

If someone runs a t/e across a floor from one socket to an extra socket on the same circuit that is minor works and not illegal.

If they run from the fuse board and connect up on the board that is illegal as this is restricted works

If a non REC runs cable for the first fix it is not illegal until someone puts power to it if you want cable running around the house with no power in it work away no issue there.

If the op first fixes the house a REC cannot certify that work and therefore legally can't connect to it if he does he is breaking the law.
.

That makes no sense (to me).

So I can run one TWE and its not illegal.
If I run 1 a week for the next year is that illegal or not?
How about 1 every 2 weeks? When does it transition from legal to illegal?

Surely, by definition "electrical works" would require electricity?
I can lay cable all over my house and its not electrical work, its moving cable from my car to my house.

EHP wrote: »

I think the op is suggesting he runs the cable and the REC threats it like an existing installation where he only certifys the second fix this essentially would be illegal works also.

So, from the REC point of view, he can test and certify/sign-off on an existing, possibly 50 year old installation as he upgrades the DB, but he somehow cannot install a new DB using much newer, yet still existing from his point of view?

Again I dont see how this is possible? Why cant the REC follow the exact same steps in both cases? Surely in both cases he needs to test the existing wiring as part of upgrading the DB? How does he know or why does he care if that wiring was pulled by me last month or by some sparks 5 years ago or the original home owner 20 years ago? Either way its an unknown installation from his pov.

2011

GreeBo wrote: »

So, from the REC point of view, he can test and certify/sign-off on an existing, possibly 50 year old installation as he upgrades the DB, but he somehow cannot install a new DB using much newer, yet still existing from his point of view?

You are confusing an electrical completion certificate with a periodic inspection report (PIR).

With the PIR a REC is carrying out a number of tests and issuing a certificate that essentially states that within the limitations of these tests the installation is ok. That is very different from issuing a completion certificate that states that the REC has installed new wiring that is 100% compliant with the current rules.

GreeBo

2011 wrote: »

You are confusing an electrical completion certificate with a periodic inspection report (PIR).

With the PIR a REC is carrying out a number of tests and issuing a certificate that essentially states that within the limitations of these tests the installation is ok. That is very different from issuing a completion certificate that states that the REC has installed new wiring that is 100% compliant with the current rules.

Fair enough.
But my point is that, unless its a new build or rewire, the REC is dealing with the same scenario, they are signing off their work based on the PIR tests.

I don't see how this is any different than them just doing a DB upgrade on wiring that I personally havent run. Either way its wiring that the REC didnt lay.

Risteard81

No they aren't signing off on there's wiring because, as I have pointed out, they are only certifying their new work and not the existing installation. Hence a section on the Completion Certificate for a description of the works. They need to ensure that their work doesn't impair the safety of the existing installation, and that the existing installation does not impair the safety of their new works. But they are not certifying anything other than their work.

New work must be certified, so your criminal proposition is not a way around this.

GreeBo

Risteard81 wrote: »

No they aren't signing off on there's wiring because, as I have pointed out, they are only certifying their new work and not the existing installation. Hence a section on the Completion Certificate for a description of the works. They need to ensure that their work doesn't impair the safety of the existing installation, and that the existing installation does not impair the safety of their new works. But they are not certifying anything other than their work.

New work must be certified, so your criminal proposition is not a way around this.

Ok, I'll try to rephrase it again.

The new work from the REC point of view is upgrading the DB, not re-wiring the house.

Whats the difference between a REC upgrading a DB using existing wiring vs upgrading a DB using wiring that I have personally run up to, but not connected to the old DB?

The REC doesnt know that I have personally run the wires vs, for example, the previous home owner running the wires 10 years ago?
In both cases they "need to ensure that their work doesn't impair the safety of the existing installation, and that the existing installation does not impair the safety of their new works. But they are not certifying anything other than their work. "

Bruthal

EHP wrote: »

If someone runs a t/e across a floor from one socket to an extra socket on the same circuit that is minor works and not illegal.

If they run from the fuse board and connect up on the board that is illegal as this is restricted works
.

My post was more in reference to another posters question about where putting in a piece of cable crosses legal boundaries. There was no mention of connecting to boards as such.

2011

GreeBo wrote: »

Whats the difference between a REC upgrading a DB using existing wiring vs upgrading a DB using wiring that I have personally run up to, but not connected to the old DB?

Case 1:
This wiring may or may not be ok but passes a routine PIR type inspection. This wiring predates the SI that deals with Restricted Works. All legal. The REC can not be held responsible for existing wiring that he / she did not install once it has passed predefined tests.

= a legal act

Case 2:
Someone has illegally installed wiring with the intention of getting a REC to connect it to scam the system. If the REC is part of this scam he / she is committing an offence. Both parties could face prosecution. I would think that it would not be plausible that the REC would think that the wiring is existing. Judges are not stupid.

= an illegal act

The REC doesnt know that I have personally run the wires vs, for example, the previous home owner running the wires 10 years ago

10 year old cable is very different to the cable used now so that won't fly. Unless of course you want to ignore the current rules as well as the law.

It would seem to me that you are just trying to find ways around the law.
Personally I don't agree with many parts of the restricted works. My own view is that only electricians should first fix all low voltage electrical cabling within a domestic installation as every DIY enthusiast seems to be of the opinion that they are as good as or better than the professionals. As this thread (and your last post) has demonstrated they tend to have a lack of understanding which can result in poor wiring, lack of compliance with the rules and possibly a dangerous installation.

In summary if you want to do electricians work become an electrician. As we see time and time again a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

GreeBo

2011 wrote: »

As this thread (and your last post) has demonstrated they tend to have a lack of understanding which can result in poor wiring, lack of compliance with the rules and possibly a dangerous installation.

In summary if you want to do electricians work become an electrician. As we see time and time again a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I dont agree that chasing walls and pulling wires is a dangerous installation, any more so that an apprentice doing it would be. The REC isn't going to blindly trust any wires that I have pulled, they would check them and if not appropriate, replace/repair as necessary.

I don't want to do electricians work, I want to do the labour intensive part as otherwise I cant get a REC to come out for anything other than ridiculous money (20K+)

I'm sure they will be beating down my door in a year or two, but for now, not so much.

Thanks for your replies.

disposableFish

GreeBo, you're probably right that actually running the cable (but not energising it) isn't in itself illegal - however, it can only become live in one of two (illegal) ways:

1. You connect it to existing circuits (ie. make the cables live) and get a REC to do follow-on work.
This is instantly an criminal act and you could personally face charges (both criminal and electrical, boom-boom).
No REC will be willing to touch anything so obviously illegal. Why would they?

2. You run the wires and get a REC to connect them.
No REC will connect wires that they haven't personally installed (or supervised the installation) and will insist on removing everything before proceeding.

EDIT:

GreeBo wrote: »

I dont agree that... pulling wires is a dangerous installation

Point is that the REC can't fully verify if it's up to spec. without having supervised installation. They will be unwilling to (and are legally forbidden from) certifying anything they can't stand over.

I think EHP had a pretty good summary when they said:

EHP wrote: »

The best the op can do is empty the house completely lift all carpets/floor boards cut all chases and offer to be there during the first fix to help pull cable but be prepared to be told not to be there. The worst part of a rewire is working around furniture etc.

That's best case. I think if you suggest what you have here to a REC they'll either run straight away or not even let you do the chasing.

disposableFish

2011 wrote: »

What if I run a HDMI lead to my TV? There is an electrical signal on it and it is chased into the wall so it is part of the installation. Technically I would think that this is illegal. Do I think anyone would ever face prosecution for this? Not a chance.

RE: HDMI is it "fixed wiring" if it isn't connected to a fixed power-source?

When you look at the layout of ethernet/tv, they're all powered on the consumer side (powered by routers/boosters that are plugged in) - ie. they're outside of the wiring network of the house.

2011

GreeBo wrote: »

I dont agree that chasing walls and pulling wires is a dangerous installation, any more so that an apprentice doing it would be.

With all due respect I would think that this is due to your lack of experience.
Many don't appreciate that cables can not simply be run "as the crow flies". I have seen some appalling, dangerous and unacceptable first fixing. Sometimes hidden repairs on cables, other times cables installed that are not suited to the ambient conditions. There are even cases of exposed live conductors. In many cases these issues can not be picked up from testing.

Let's not forget that apprentices are supervised and electricians are held responsible for their actions and that is before we even think of the insurance implications.

The REC isn't going to blindly trust any wires that I have pulled, they would check them and if not appropriate, replace/repair as necessary.

So now the electrician should provide full time supervision your illegal works? Good luck with that!

I don't want to do electricians work, I want to do the labour intensive part

I hate to break it to you, but that is electrician's work. I should know I did it for 15 years, in fact that is part of the reason I got out of it.

as otherwise I cant get a REC to come out for anything other than ridiculous money (20K+)

There are other things you may be able to do to reduce the price, such as:
1) Empty the house fully
2) Do all of the chases as marked by the REC
4) Drill all joists as marked by the REC

I'm sure they will be beating down my door in a year or two, but for now, not so much.

Perhaps, but I very much doubt it.
Either way this is not of much use to you is it?

For the record, I have no axe to grind. I have not worked on my tools for a long time now (well over 10 years), I am not a REC, nor am I employed by one. However I have worked in the industry for a very long time and still do.

2011

disposableFish wrote: »

RE: HDMI is it "fixed wiring" if it isn't connected to a fixed power-source?

Does this definition of “fixed wiring” align with the legal one?
Does the term “fixed wiring” even appear in the Restricted Works paper or the SI?

When you look at the layout of ethernet/tv, they're all powered on the consumer side (powered by routers/boosters that are plugged in) - ie. they're outside of the wiring network of the house.

That is your view, the law suggests otherwise. I was simply illustrating how outrageous the restricted works definition is, as stated I don’t agree with it.

disposableFish

2011 wrote: »

Does this definition of “fixed wiring” align with the legal one?
Does the term “fixed wiring” even appear in the Restricted Works paper or the SI?

That is your view, the law suggests otherwise. I was simply illustrating how outrageous the restricted works definition is, as stated I don’t agree with it.

I'm (clearly) no expert, but my understanding was that the general gist of the laws is that it's illegal for a non-rec to alter any part/layout of the circuit up to the user point (sockets etc.). That things like ethernet/HDMI are essentially no different to plugging in an extension lead. The important being that you still have all the protection upstream of that point.

EHP

See below definition of restricted works as per Safe Electric. Might help or make it more confusing. Ethernet cables, TV cables etc do not fall under these rules as they are not wired to the distribution network.

Definition of Restricted Electrical Works

As set out in Statutory Instruments, S.I. No. 264 of 2013, Restricted Electrical Works are:

the installation, commissioning, inspection and testing of a new Electrical Installation which is fixed, fastened or mounted or otherwise secured so that its position does not change and requires connection or re-connection to the distribution network or the transmission network, as the case may be;
the modification, installation or replacement of a Distribution Board including customer tails on either side of the Main Protective Device or of an Electrical Installation in any of the special locations listed in Part 7 of the National Rules for Electrical Installations, as the case may be;
the installation or replacement of one or more circuits in an Electrical Installation, including the installation of one or more additional protective devices for such circuits on a Distribution Board; or
the inspection, testing or certification of, or reporting on, existing Electrical Installations covered by Chapter 62 of the National Rules for Electrical Installations;
in a Domestic Property.

2011

disposableFish wrote: »

I'm (clearly) no expert, but my understanding was that the general gist of the laws is that it's illegal for a non-rec to alter any part/layout of the circuit up to the user point (sockets etc.). That things like ethernet/HDMI are essentially no different to plugging in an extension lead. The important being that you still have all the protection upstream of that point.

I’m no expert either. Maybe on that point you are right, but what about the satellite? That’s permanently connected.

disposableFish

2011 wrote: »

I’m no expert either. Maybe on that point you are right, but what about the satellite? That’s permanently connected.

TBH I've never had satellite tv and don't know the details.

2011

disposableFish wrote: »

TBH I've never had satellite tv and don't know the details.

I did my own but don’t tell anyone

GreeBo

2011 wrote: »

I did my own but don’t tell anyone

Scammer. :eek:

TheChizler

2011 wrote: »

I did my own but don’t tell anyone

I think we're all agreed that the regs are annoyingly broad reaching and thus vague as to what is practically ok or not. Nobody is their right mind is ever going to prosecute someone for pulling satellite cables, but for some reason technically this meets the definition of restricted works, so how do you know for sure where the line lies? Of course it's clear what will be fine or not on the extremes, clearly they'd have a problem with the works in the OP but not running signalling cable for instance.

17larsson

It's just low voltage circuits isn't it? I don't think there's any law against extra low voltage cables (TV, data etc.)