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

GreeBo

Risteard81 wrote: »

I'm just trying to keep you out of Portlaoise.

Other than sparks posing as RECI's I havent seen or heard of anyone getting a fine nevermind jail time...have you?

2011

@ GreeBo this back and forth is not working. A few points, for the purposes of this let’s assume a good REC is being used (the fact that they are not all good is a separate argument):

1) If a REC makes modifications to an existing installation the REC will not be held responsible for work that has been carried out by others. The REC will of course be expected to inspect and test parts of the installation so as to mitigate the risk of an incident. The documentation that they will issue will make this clear. So for example is a poor join on an existing cable that could not possible be found by the REC during an inspection the REC would not he held accountable.

2) Let’s assume that you are capable of doing the best first fix ever. You must accept that others are not as talented and diligent as you. This would mean installs by these less worthy individuals would not meet the required standards. This puts people, property and livelihoods at risk. So what makes these installations different to the old and decrepit installations RECs also work on I hear you say??? Answer with the new installations the REC is accountable for all of the wiring installation which would include the parts where short cuts were taken by someone first fixing that didn’t know or perhaps did not care about what they were doing.

3) Regardless of your opinion on this matter electrical tests carried out are not infallible. There are issues that do occur that these tests simply will not pick up. This does not mean that the tests are useless, it means that they are limited in what they can tell us.

4) Your views and my views on insurance and the probability of something going horribly wrong are not what dictates what the law is. You are ignoring the fact that what you proposing is illegal

5) RECs no more than anyone else in the building game are risk averse, from experience certain things raise red flags. Letting any random individual “have a go” at first fixing isn’t just dangers and irresponsible it reduces the chances of a REC getting paid. Being an electrician is a tough old slog (I should know). Getting paid is very important, that is why these people are in the game. From experience I know certain ways of first fixing can dramatically reduce costs, materials and installation time. It can also impact on the appearance of an installation when complete which impacts on the REC’s reputation.

6) Here is another example of what can go wrong: There are important EU laws regarding the types of cables are legally permitted all cables must now comply with EN50575. This is to do with the way the cable insulation burns. Again this is a legal thing you can dismiss but someone like me has to show due diligence.

7) You are quick to dismiss apprentices. It is important to appreciate that they are constantly being trained and supervision is only relaxed as they improve and earn trust. How can you compare a fully supervised inexperienced apprentice or a far more experienced less supervised apprentice to some randomer that a REC does not know from Adam? That argument makes no sense.

2011

GreeBo wrote: »

Other than sparks posing as RECI's I havent seen or heard of anyone getting a fine nevermind jail time...have you?

Some have been jailed, Google is your friend.

2011

Mod note: This is an important topic. Please keep it friendly. No smart remarks. No posts have been edited or deleted, I want to keep it that way. Thank you.

GreeBo

2011 wrote: »

@ GreeBo this back and forth is not working.

I thought thats how discussions work? Points/questions followed by replies?

2011 wrote: »

1) If a REC makes modifications to an existing installation the REC will not be held responsible for work that has been carried out by others. The REC will of course be expected to inspect and test parts of the installation so as to mitigate the risk of an incident. The documentation that they will issue will make this clear. So for example is a poor join on an existing cable that could not possible be found by the REC during an inspection the REC would not he held accountable.

100% agree. But I fail to see how my poor join is any different than the existing poor join in my house?
BTW I have never once mentioned accountability.

2011 wrote: »

2) Let’s assume that you are capable of doing the best first fix ever. You must accept that others are not as talented and diligent as you. This would mean installs by these less worthy individuals would not meet the required standards. This puts people, property and livelihoods at risk. So what makes these installations different to the old and decrepit installations RECs also work on I hear you say??? Answer with the new installations the REC is accountable for all of the wiring installation which would include the parts where short cuts were taken by someone first fixing that didn’t know or perhaps did not care about what they were doing.

This only makes sense if a REC is obliged to rewire any house/circuit that doesnt have an existing cert, otherwise your "what makes them different" answer doesnt actually answer the question. There is nothing that says a REC has to rewire existing installations, so they are, today, already working on old, decrepit installations. There is nothing that makes the old installations any different from my new installation, from the RECs point of view (other than I'd rather rely on mine than 50 year old crap)

2011 wrote: »

3) Regardless of your opinion on this matter electrical tests carried out are not infallible. There are issues that do occur that these tests simply will not pick up. This does not mean that the tests are useless, it means that they are limited in what they can tell us.

I never said that they were. My only expectation is that the REC would test my wiring in exactly the same was as they would test existing wiring, since, from their point of view, its all existing wiring.

2011 wrote: »

4) Your views and my views on insurance and the probability of something going horribly wrong are not what dictates what the law is. You are ignoring the fact that what you proposing is illegal

I'm not, I dont think I have ever said it was legal, I've just asked where the line is.
I made two posts about adding 1 spur per week for a year and also adding spurs where they should not go, but they were ignored by everyone thus far.

2011 wrote: »

5) RECs no more than anyone else in the building game are risk averse, from experience certain things raise red flags. Letting any random individual “have a go” at first fixing isn’t just dangers and irresponsible it reduces the chances of a REC getting paid. Being an electrician is a tough old slog (I should know). Getting paid is very important, that is why these people are in the game. From experience I know certain ways of first fixing can dramatically reduce costs, materials and installation time. It can also impact on the appearance of an installation when complete which impacts on the REC’s reputation.

The costs & materials are irrelevant, the REC would give a quote and then thats the quote, I dont follow your point here.
The appearance of the installation would again be something that I would own, since I'd run the cabling.

2011 wrote: »

6) Here is another example of what can go wrong: There are important EU laws regarding the types of cables are legally permitted all cables must now comply with EN50575. This is to do with the way the cable insulation burns. Again this is a legal thing you can dismiss but someone like me has to show due diligence.

Where would I buy cable in Ireland that doesnt comply with EN50575?

2011 wrote: »

7) You are quick to dismiss apprentices. It is important to appreciate that they are constantly being trained and supervision is only relaxed as they improve and earn trust. How can you compare a fully supervised inexperienced apprentice or a far more experienced less supervised apprentice to some randomer that a REC does not know from Adam? That argument makes no sense.

I'm not dismissing them at all, my point is that unless you are stating as fact that the sparks is watching and confirming every inch of what the apprentice does, its no worse than them checking what I have done after the fact.

I'm not comparing any randomer, I'm comparing the circuits that I would pull with the existing ones in my house.
The REC is happy to use the 50 year old existing ones but not the brand new ones that I have pulled.
That argument makes no sense to me.

/edit to add that I'm not arguing about its legality (though I think there is scope for confusion since pulling wires that are not connected isn't electrical work since there is no electricity!)

GreeBo

2011 wrote: »

Some have been jailed, Google is your friend.

Can you please share your results?
All I can find are people done for posing as RECs

"The Commission for Energy Regulation (CER) successfully secured the prosecution against the man for illegally carrying out restricted electrical works and portraying himself as a registered electrical contractor."

2011

@ GreeBo: Too busy right now. Will respond later. I don’t disagree with all of your points you just misunderstand some of mine I think. What part of the country are you in?

GreeBo

2011 wrote: »

@ GreeBo: Too busy right now. Will respond later. I don’t disagree with all of your points you just misunderstand some of mine I think. What part of the country are you in?

no worries.

South Dublin.

2011

GreeBo wrote: »

no worries.

South Dublin.

I will send you a PM

GreeBo

Something else that occurred to me last night.

Are these regs only applicable for houses connected to the grid?

If my house was completely off grid, solar panels, wind turbine and perhaps my EV and/or a diesel generator + inverter, then I assume I am free to do whatever I want?

How would you then convert this house to mains/grid?

Admittedly a convoluted example, but a valid question none the less I think.

hedzball

GreeBo wrote: »

How would you then convert this house to mains/grid?

You'd need to get a connection cert. Which is supplied by a rec.. so back to square one.

GreeBo

hedzball wrote: »

You'd need to get a connection cert. Which is supplied by a rec.. so back to square one.

Ok, but whats involved in that?
Unless its only possible by having a REC rewire the house from scratch which I cant imagine is the case?

Risteard81

On the issue of cable selection I notice that Woodie's are still stocking the prohibited UK type of T&E. I remember making this observation a few months back too. Why are they selling cable which hasn't been permissible to install for two whole years now?

Bruthal

Risteard81 wrote: »

On the issue of cable selection I notice that Woodie's are still stocking the prohibited UK type of T&E. I remember making this observation a few months back too. Why are they selling cable which hasn't been permissible to install for two whole years now?

In case I add a socket in my utility room

Risteard81

Bruthal wrote: »

Risteard81 wrote: »

On the issue of cable selection I notice that Woodie's are still stocking the prohibited UK type of T&E. I remember making this observation a few months back too. Why are they selling cable which hasn't been permissible to install for two whole years now?

In case I add a socket in my utility room

I realise you're being facetious, but there's absolutely no reason nor excuse for not using the correct cable.

TheChizler

What was the reason for banning the non encased earth? I've talked to a couple of RECs who were of the opinion it was absolutely pointless.

Bruthal

Risteard81 wrote: »

I realise you're being facetious, but there's absolutely no reason nor excuse for not using the correct cable.

Is it only in electrical that there is no excuses for imperfection, or all aspects of life?

Bruthal

TheChizler wrote: »

What was the reason for banning the non encased earth? I've talked to a couple of RECs who were of the opinion it was absolutely pointless.

The earth is the same size as live conductors in it too. It does help with loop impedence on longer circuits. It was less than half the size before.

Risteard81

Bruthal wrote: »

TheChizler wrote: »

What was the reason for banning the non encased earth? I've talked to a couple of RECs who were of the opinion it was absolutely pointless.

The earth is the same size as live conductors in it too. It does help with loop impedence on longer circuits. It was less than half the size before.

Not necessarily. It depended on the size of the cable, e.g. 1.5mm^2 had a 1mm^2 cpc and 2.5mm^2 had a 1.5mm^2 cpc. 16mm^2 I.S. T&E had a 10mm^2 cpc (6mm^2 for BS cable). None of these clearly were less than half the cross-sectional area.

Bruthal

Risteard81 wrote: »

Not necessarily. It depended on the size of the cable, e.g. 1.5mm^2 had a 1mm^2 cpc and 2.5mm^2 had a 1.5mm^2 cpc. 16mm^2 I.S. T&E had a 10mm^2 cpc (6mm^2 for BS cable). None of these clearly were less than half the cross-sectional area.

I thought you would be in quicker for the 13+13=26 twin socket one:pac:

Risteard81

Bruthal wrote: »

Risteard81 wrote: »

Not necessarily. It depended on the size of the cable, e.g. 1.5mm^2 had a 1mm^2 cpc and 2.5mm^2 had a 1.5mm^2 cpc. 16mm^2 I.S. T&E had a 10mm^2 cpc (6mm^2 for BS cable). None of these clearly were less than half the cross-sectional area.

I thought you would be in quicker for the 13+13=26 twin socket one:pac:

A double socket-outlet is only rated at 20A.

Bruthal

Risteard81 wrote: »

A
A double socket-outlet is only rated at 20A.

And 1+1=2

You actually came in asking that as a question before which was amusing.

And the t&e sizes you have told us all before as well.
I was wondering if you would still be in as quick this time as that last time when I said the same thing, which confirms that you disappear when asked anything less obvious, but in like a shot for pedantic stuff:pac:

At least there is some amusement back to the forum though, which is not a bad thing.

Risteard81

I don't disappear. But I can tell you that you're talking complete and utter ****e which isn't helpful or informative to anyone.

Bruthal

Risteard81 wrote: »

But I can tell you that you're talking complete and utter ****e

Indeed you can:)

xckjoo

GreeBo wrote: »

Ok, but whats involved in that?
Unless its only possible by having a REC rewire the house from scratch which I cant imagine is the case?

Not an electrician or a lawyer but I think one thing that's catching you is the issue of old houses having wiring that could have been done by anybody so how is it different if you run some wires now? Probably best to think of it as when regulations are added they are not retroactive but must be followed from that day forward. It would be prohibitively expensive to retrofit all homes as new regulations come in. There might even be an argument that they're somewhat proven safe in that they're still standing but realistically it's probably the cost thing.

Bruthal

I would not have been into doing the second fix on a house with the owner diy first fix, long before any regulations on RECs came in. Back as far as the 80s.

Not that I will ever be wiring one again.