Hi All,

A mate has just has his (ist floor)  flat (that is going to be up for
sale / rent soon) electrically inspected and failed because there was
no (extra) earth wire between the CU and the cooker (or that's how he
put it to me).

He asked me to help him add the 'wire' (earth bond?) pre re-inspection
but I wasn't sure what that would involve.

Also he's reluctant to rip up the (new) floor so was talking about
running it across the ceiling in some plastic trunking etc (no my way
of doing things but ..) 

Out of interest (and in case I do get dragged into it) what sort thing
are we looking at please (where would the cable join at the CU end,
what diameter would it be (it sounds like it could be say a 10m run?),
where does it join at the cooker end etc) please?

All the best ..

T i m

"T i m"  wrote in message 
news:np2th1p06e204p8547d3c407k0e4moc543@4ax.com...

>
> Out of interest (and in case I do get dragged into it) what sort thing
> are we looking at please (where would the cable join at the CU end,
> what diameter would it be (it sounds like it could be say a 10m run?),
> where does it join at the cooker end etc) please?


There's no regulatory requirement to add additional bonding to a cooker (or 
anything else in a domestic kitchen), so it's impossible to answer a 
question about how one should do this.

You need to find out what exactly it's been failed on.  It's entirely 
possible that whoever inspected it doesn't know the rules but just fancied 
that they'd like to see a bit more green and yellow voodoo looped around 
everything.

If there's no earth to the cooker at all, then it's likely that there's a 
serious problem with the wiring to the cooker (possibly either cable damage 
or an installation problem).  He really needs to investigate this (urgently) 
rather than just add another earth cable.

Will

T i m wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> A mate has just has his (ist floor)  flat (that is going to be up for
> sale / rent soon) electrically inspected and failed because there was
> no (extra) earth wire between the CU and the cooker (or that's how he
> put it to me).


It may not be the case, but this sounds a bit like a fishing exercise
to me.

I would not be at all surprised to find that in this Brave New
Post-Part-P World there are companies offering cheap (or even free)
electical checks with the idea that they can then persuade the victim^W
customer to pay over the odds for some simple job that they have
discovered needs doing - even if it isn't really required.

Did the company doing the test do it for some sort of "special price"?

Did they offer to put things right themselves, and if so for how much?

> A mate has just has his (ist floor)  flat (that is going to be up for
> sale / rent soon) electrically inspected and failed because there was
> no (extra) earth wire between the CU and the cooker (or that's how he
> put it to me).


What extra earth?

You'll need to find exactly what it has failed on. The only "extra" earths
required in domestic properties are supplementary and main equipotential
bonding. Supplementary bonding is only required in bathrooms, so it isn't
that. Main equipotential bonding is required to the main incoming services,
if they're made of metal, or the internal services of the house if they're
made of metal. (If both are metal, then only one bond is still required).

The only other possibility I can think if is that the earth loop impedence
test failed for the cooker, and an additional earth was specified to bring
it down, although I think this would be a bit of a bodge.

Christian.

"Christian McArdle"  wrote in message 
news:431ea655$0$6471$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net...

>
> The only other possibility I can think if is that the earth loop impedence
> test failed for the cooker, and an additional earth was specified to bring
> it down, although I think this would be a bit of a bodge.


Yes, I considered this too, but I couldn't think of a realistic situation in 
which high Zs for the cooker didn't really indicate something more important 
than 'more earth copper required on this circuit'.

For example, it *could* be a warning of 'nail hammered through middle of 
cooker cable'.

I suspect that Chinese Whispers is the biggest problem here at the moment.

Will

On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 09:46:27 +0100, "Will Dean"
 wrote:


>"Christian McArdle"  wrote in message 
>news:431ea655$0$6471$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net...
>>
>> The only other possibility I can think if is that the earth loop impedence
>> test failed for the cooker, and an additional earth was specified to bring
>> it down, although I think this would be a bit of a bodge.
>
>Yes, I considered this too, but I couldn't think of a realistic situation in 
>which high Zs for the cooker didn't really indicate something more important 
>than 'more earth copper required on this circuit'.
>
>For example, it *could* be a warning of 'nail hammered through middle of 
>cooker cable'.
>
>I suspect that Chinese Whispers is the biggest problem here at the moment.
>
>Will


Hi all and thanks for the suggestions / questions so far. In light of
the form of the replies I can see why the question may have seem vague
etc.

I spoke to my 'mate' (he's just someone I have been friendly with for
many years now rather than a mate as such)  again today and he said
the 'guy' who did the test did actually suggest what was needed and
why but he didn't actually take it in (as *he* wasn't going to be
doing the job himself anyway) .. but the info could be had with a
phonecall.

However I was given some extra info that may support the 'problem'
though as the 'tester' (apparently) also mentioned the earth on the
cooker socket was 'iffy' but that could be taken from an adjacent
double socket ..?

I also happened to speak to an electrician this morning (in the car
spares shop whilst getting bits for Mums boiler <g>) and he couldn't
see any specific requirement either?

My mate added this work would need to be done if the place was to be
rented but not if it was sold (I would have thought it would apply to
both ..?)

Not sure if any of that helps?

All the best ..

T i m

p.s. I'm not sure if I want to get involved now in any case ...  ;-(





>

"T i m"  wrote in message 
news:13mth1hc0cbim68ol529205nrg28tqkjou@4ax.com...

>
> However I was given some extra info that may support the 'problem'
> though as the 'tester' (apparently) also mentioned the earth on the
> cooker socket was 'iffy' but that could be taken from an adjacent
> double socket ..?


This sounds very dodgy.  If there's a problem with the cable supplying the 
cooker, it needs investigating.

I would encourage him to get it sorted-out properly, perhaps not involving a 
chain of 'tradespeople' who are coincidentally the brothers-in-law of mates 
who work down the local laundrette.

Will

> However I was given some extra info that may support the 'problem'
> though as the 'tester' (apparently) also mentioned the earth on the
> cooker socket was 'iffy' but that could be taken from an adjacent
> double socket ..?


OK, if this is the case, then the cooker supply circuit sounds knackered.
I'd replace the entire cable run. If the earth is gone, then there is no
reason to trust the circuit conductors, either.

Christian.

On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 14:19:12 +0100, "Christian McArdle"
 wrote:


>> However I was given some extra info that may support the 'problem'
>> though as the 'tester' (apparently) also mentioned the earth on the
>> cooker socket was 'iffy' but that could be taken from an adjacent
>> double socket ..?
>
>OK, if this is the case, then the cooker supply circuit sounds knackered.
>I'd replace the entire cable run. If the earth is gone, then there is no
>reason to trust the circuit conductors, either.
>
>Christian.
>

Will / Christian,

Thanks again for your thoughts ..

This mate is one of those who does things on the fly without full
consideration  .. not a 'risk taker' as such but likes to move much
quicker than I am generally comfortable with (like "let's go round
there now and we can sort it" .. no tools, no idea of the rules etc
etc)).

I asked why can't he couldn't run 'whatever, properly' and he said
"because I've just had a new laminate floor put down" (hence his idea
of running the extra earth cable over the celieng in conduit?). ;-(

I think I'll just 'be busy' for a while .. ;-)

All the best and thanks for the advice guys ..

T i m

> I asked why can't he couldn't run 'whatever, properly' and he said
> "because I've just had a new laminate floor put down" (hence his idea
> of running the extra earth cable over the celieng in conduit?). ;-(


I'm just saying that if you run anything back to the consumer unit, make it
6mm+ T&E, not a single earth.

Christian.

T i m wrote:


> My mate added this work would need to be done if the place was to be
> rented but not if it was sold (I would have thought it would apply to
> both ..?)


Presumably because as a landlord you'd be liable if your tenant 
electrocuted themselves, whereas it would (presumably, IANAL) be a case 
of caveat emptor if a future owner did the same thing?

David

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:19:23 +0000, T i m wrote:



> My mate added this work would need to be done if the place was to be
> rented but not if it was sold (I would have thought it would apply to
> both ..?)
> 


Currently to sell a place the purchaser may choose to have the electrical
installation surveyed. They do not usually choose to do so unless
perhaps there is a strong possibility that it will yield a bargaining
point for them.

For shorthold rented accomodation the requirement is that the electrical
installation is 'safe'.  Lettings Agencies vary in how they manage this
requirement. The strictest (Universities' letting offices) and the
most upmarket simply insisting on the a 'Periodic Test & Inspection'
report. 

-- 
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk 
Gas fitting FAQ  http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFitting.html
Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/SealedCH.html

On 7 Sep,  
     T i m  wrote:


> Hi All,
> 
> A mate has just has his (ist floor)  flat (that is going to be up for
> sale / rent soon) electrically inspected and failed because there was
> no (extra) earth wire between the CU and the cooker (or that's how he
> put it to me).


Is the CU the consumer unit or the connection unit for the cooker?

-- 
  B Thumbs
  Change lycos to yahoo to reply

In article <431ee8d0$0$6466$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net>,
   Christian McArdle  wrote:

> > However I was given some extra info that may support the 'problem'
> > though as the 'tester' (apparently) also mentioned the earth on the
> > cooker socket was 'iffy' but that could be taken from an adjacent
> > double socket ..?

> OK, if this is the case, then the cooker supply circuit sounds knackered.
> I'd replace the entire cable run. If the earth is gone, then there is no
> reason to trust the circuit conductors, either.


I'd first do a physical inspection of the cooker outlet since a broken or
loose earth wire at the actual terminal isn't unknown. I'd next check the
CU for the same thing at the other end. IMHO, this is rather more common
than cable damage.

-- 
*The severity of the itch is proportional to the reach *

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

> I'd first do a physical inspection of the cooker outlet since a broken or
> loose earth wire at the actual terminal isn't unknown. I'd next check the
> CU for the same thing at the other end. IMHO, this is rather more common
> than cable damage.


Indeed, but I would have expected a full electrical inspection to have done
this. It could have been a cheapie, plug things in, but don't disassemble
anything type inspection, though.

Christian.

In article <43203cc0$0$6482$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net>,
   Christian McArdle  wrote:

> > I'd first do a physical inspection of the cooker outlet since a broken
> > or loose earth wire at the actual terminal isn't unknown. I'd next
> > check the CU for the same thing at the other end. IMHO, this is rather
> > more common than cable damage.

> Indeed, but I would have expected a full electrical inspection to have
> done this.


Really? Wouldn't that come more under repairing? I'd expect - but don't
really know - that it would all be done with just pluggy in things.


> It could have been a cheapie, plug things in, but don't
> disassemble anything type inspection, though.


Not had one done, but the old LEB inspection of a new installation
consisted of physically looking inside a socket and light switch but
testing the whole lot with megger, etc.

-- 
*Reality is a crutch for people who can't handle drugs.

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 12:31:45 +0100,  wrote:


>On 7 Sep,  
>     T i m  wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> A mate has just has his (ist floor)  flat (that is going to be up for
>> sale / rent soon) electrically inspected and failed because there was
>> no (extra) earth wire between the CU and the cooker (or that's how he
>> put it to me).
>
>Is the CU the consumer unit or the connection unit for the cooker?


I *believe* he was referring to the consumer unit (but with him you
never know ..) ;-(

He's one of these guys that says "I could do it myself but ..." (but
only if it is *very* easy and just clips in or can get a mug to do it
for a drink .. ) ;-)

I'm busying myself rigging mums water buts up to her main rainwater
downpipe (oh, and digging the garden clear, buying, lugging about and
laying two 600mm sq slabs, buying the components, cutting the
downpipe,  drilling the holes in the buts ... ) ;-)

All the best ..

T i m