help with wiring regs - dispute with land lord

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Duncan

unread,
May 28, 2007, 7:51:34 AM5/28/07
to
The electric hob in my rented flat burned out when no-one was there,
producing smoke from inside the hob, melting the control knobs and
blowing a fuse at the consumer unit. The cleaner had cleaned the hob
earlier in the day and is sure that it was switched off. He was also
the first person back in the flat and he cut the cable to the hob and
replaced the fuse. As it is unclear what caused the fire, I (tenant)
agreed to replace the hob at my own expense. But I refused to connect
it because I believe the wiring is not safe, based on my recent
research prior to having a hob installed in my own property. I had an
electrician inspect the landlord's wiring and comfirm in writing that
it is sub-standard. I've sent this to the landlord who is still
refusing to upgrade the wiring.

I need some advise.

This is what I found.

A 2.5mm^2 cable into a standard double socket lying on the floor under
the oven. A 2.5mm^2 cable wired into this outlet supplying the old hob
(cut by cleaner). The oven was plugged into the one of teh sockets
with a 13A plug. The oven is rated at 2400W and the new hob (which
looks just like the old hob) is 5kW. The rating sticker on the old hob
was melted by the fire. There is no isolator switch and the
electrician said that the supply was a spur from the ring main.

I have a copy of the brown on site guide and I can find places in the
guide where the wiring doesn't meet recommendations. But is the wiring
actually illegal, and can I make the landlord fix it? Specific refs to
the onsite guide might help my case.

Another question, and less important, but could the wiring have caused
or contributed to the failure of the hob itself? The electrician
thought so, but I don't see why.

many thanks,
Duncan

meow...@care2.com

unread,
May 28, 2007, 11:10:36 AM5/28/07
to
On 28 May, 12:51, Duncan <duncan.gr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The electric hob in my rented flat burned out when no-one was there,
> producing smoke from inside the hob, melting the control knobs and
> blowing a fuse at the consumer unit. The cleaner had cleaned the hob
> earlier in the day and is sure that it was switched off. He was also
> the first person back in the flat and he cut the cable to the hob and
> replaced the fuse. As it is unclear what caused the fire, I (tenant)
> agreed to replace the hob at my own expense.

I dont see why, the landlord is normally responsible for that


> But I refused to connect
> it because I believe the wiring is not safe, based on my recent
> research prior to having a hob installed in my own property. I had an
> electrician inspect the landlord's wiring and comfirm in writing that
> it is sub-standard.

sub- which standard? A common mistake is to imagine existing wiring
must meet the latest regs - sparks like to push this view because they
want work.


> I've sent this to the landlord who is still
> refusing to upgrade the wiring.
>
> I need some advise.
>
> This is what I found.
>
> A 2.5mm^2 cable into a standard double socket lying on the floor under
> the oven. A 2.5mm^2 cable wired into this outlet supplying the old hob
> (cut by cleaner).

ok if the hob is rated at <3.1kW max. Most are higher power but
pluggable ones are also obtainable.


> The oven was plugged into the one of teh sockets
> with a 13A plug. The oven is rated at 2400W

thats normal

> and the new hob (which
> looks just like the old hob) is 5kW.

then you wont be able to put the new hob on a plug - looks like
someone bought the wrong type.


> The rating sticker on the old hob
> was melted by the fire. There is no isolator switch and the
> electrician said that the supply was a spur from the ring main.
>
> I have a copy of the brown on site guide and I can find places in the
> guide where the wiring doesn't meet recommendations. But is the wiring
> actually illegal,

precisely


> and can I make the landlord fix it?

What you may be able to do is get him to replace the hob. Thats it.

> Specific refs to
> the onsite guide might help my case.

not really


> Another question, and less important, but could the wiring have caused
> or contributed to the failure of the hob itself?

No


> The electrician
> thought so, but I don't see why.

then he either doesnt have much clue, or is happy to talk sht to get
more work.


NT

Mogga

unread,
May 28, 2007, 11:38:53 AM5/28/07
to
On 28 May 2007 04:51:34 -0700, Duncan <duncan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>The electric hob in my rented flat burned out when no-one was there,
>producing smoke from inside the hob, melting the control knobs and
>blowing a fuse at the consumer unit. The cleaner had cleaned the hob
>earlier in the day and is sure that it was switched off. He was also
>the first person back in the flat and he cut the cable to the hob and
>replaced the fuse. As it is unclear what caused the fire, I (tenant)
>agreed to replace the hob at my own expense. But I refused to connect

Why did you agree to pay for it? Does your cleaner not have insurance?

If you've got to replace the hob why not buy one of those ones you can
just plug in and take it with you when you move?

>it because I believe the wiring is not safe, based on my recent
>research prior to having a hob installed in my own property. I had an
>electrician inspect the landlord's wiring and comfirm in writing that
>it is sub-standard. I've sent this to the landlord who is still
>refusing to upgrade the wiring.
>
>I need some advise.
>
>This is what I found.
>
>A 2.5mm^2 cable into a standard double socket lying on the floor under
>the oven. A 2.5mm^2 cable wired into this outlet supplying the old hob
>(cut by cleaner). The oven was plugged into the one of teh sockets
>with a 13A plug. The oven is rated at 2400W and the new hob (which
>looks just like the old hob) is 5kW. The rating sticker on the old hob
>was melted by the fire. There is no isolator switch and the
>electrician said that the supply was a spur from the ring main.
>
>I have a copy of the brown on site guide and I can find places in the
>guide where the wiring doesn't meet recommendations. But is the wiring
>actually illegal, and can I make the landlord fix it? Specific refs to
>the onsite guide might help my case.
>
>Another question, and less important, but could the wiring have caused
>or contributed to the failure of the hob itself? The electrician
>thought so, but I don't see why.
>
>many thanks,
>Duncan

--
http://www.orderonlinepickupinstore.co.uk
Ah fetch it yourself if you can't wait for delivery
http://www.freedeliveryuk.co.uk
Or get it delivered for free

Duncan

unread,
May 28, 2007, 1:38:28 PM5/28/07
to
The spark (from Mr Electric, a nationwide franchise) said the wiring
supplying the cooker was sub-standard (didn't cite which standard) and
he couldn't connect my new hob because:

1. it was on a spur from the main ring
2. there is no isolator switch
3. cable of insufficient cross-sectional area

The hob that burnt out was rated at 5.703 kW (careful scrutiny of
burnt label). It's a Hygena APM1220. So the existing wiring was
inadequate even for the old hob.

With hindsight, I shouldn't have offered to pay for the replacement.
The contract says that I'm responsible for maintaining the interior of
the flat, and it just didn't seem to be worth the hassle of arguing
for the sake of the £89 I could spend on a replacement hob from B+Q.
But I hadn't looked at the wiring then. So should I pay for the new
wiring required to put in a the new hob, or should the landlord? Seems
obvious to me it should be the landlord. But he insists the existiong
wiring is fine. "Bob did it and he did the wiring for the hobs in all
the other flats and they haven't had any problems..."

So I need to convince the landlord that the wiring is not, in fact,
fine.

Duncan


John Rumm

unread,
May 28, 2007, 1:50:06 PM5/28/07
to
Duncan wrote:

> The electric hob in my rented flat burned out when no-one was there,
> producing smoke from inside the hob, melting the control knobs and
> blowing a fuse at the consumer unit. The cleaner had cleaned the hob
> earlier in the day and is sure that it was switched off. He was also
> the first person back in the flat and he cut the cable to the hob and
> replaced the fuse. As it is unclear what caused the fire, I (tenant)
> agreed to replace the hob at my own expense. But I refused to connect

Not sure I would have done that, since of all the places you could
attribute blame, you seem least culpable. Even if you have left it
turned on, it should not have caused it any damage.

> I need some advise.
>
> This is what I found.
>
> A 2.5mm^2 cable into a standard double socket lying on the floor under
> the oven. A 2.5mm^2 cable wired into this outlet supplying the old hob
> (cut by cleaner). The oven was plugged into the one of teh sockets
> with a 13A plug. The oven is rated at 2400W and the new hob (which
> looks just like the old hob) is 5kW. The rating sticker on the old hob
> was melted by the fire. There is no isolator switch and the
> electrician said that the supply was a spur from the ring main.

Well that does not meet today's standards on a number of counts. In fact
I doubt it ever did. However it is worth looking at the detail to see if
there is an immediate risk:

The oven plugging into the socket is fine.
The one double socket on a spur from the ring is fine.

However a 5kW point load on the ring from the hob is not desirable. It
may or may not be dangerous (the ring is designed to supply up to 7.6 kW
of power in total, but the design expects the load to be distributed
around the ring). Being a domestic premises you are also allowed to
apply diversity to the cooker load since the chances of it ever drawing
full load (at least for a prolonged time) is minimal. In this case if
you take peak load as 2400 + 5000 = 7400, that's a current draw of say
31A (a little more than the maximum capacity of the 2.5mm^2 cable).
Applying diversity you get 10 + 30% of 21 = that would bring the total
load down to about 16.3A. Even so, this is the sort of load that ought
to be on a dedicated radial. With things as they stand it would be easy
to overload the ring with other appliances. If the ring in question also
feeds the kitchen with things like washing machines and other high
current using appliances in it then the circuit provision is inadequate
for its intended usage.

If the hob and oven were in the middle of the cable run then used by
itself it ought not cause any cable damage, even when you add the oven
load to it. If the spur was close to one end of the ring however then it
may damage one of the cables.

There should also be an isolator within 2m of the hob (being fixed
equipment).

> I have a copy of the brown on site guide and I can find places in the
> guide where the wiring doesn't meet recommendations. But is the wiring
> actually illegal, and can I make the landlord fix it? Specific refs to
> the onsite guide might help my case.

I have a feeling the landlord ought to have an inspection certificate
for the wiring - although this may only need to be a visual inspection
cert.

> Another question, and less important, but could the wiring have caused
> or contributed to the failure of the hob itself? The electrician
> thought so, but I don't see why.

Possibly, although relatively unlikely. At full load you may have been
getting localised heating at the point the hob joined the cable. Over
time that could damage insulation in the hob, which in turn could cause
the meltdown. Water getting into the electrics as a result of cleaning
seems more likely though.


--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

meow...@care2.com

unread,
May 28, 2007, 2:04:29 PM5/28/07
to
On 28 May, 18:38, Duncan <duncan.gr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The spark (from Mr Electric, a nationwide franchise) said the wiring
> supplying the cooker was sub-standard (didn't cite which standard)

then you lack anything of use to move you to your goal..


> and
> he couldn't connect my new hob because:
>
> 1. it was on a spur from the main ring
> 2. there is no isolator switch
> 3. cable of insufficient cross-sectional area
>
> The hob that burnt out was rated at 5.703 kW (careful scrutiny of
> burnt label). It's a Hygena APM1220. So the existing wiring was
> inadequate even for the old hob.

Or to look at it another way, it was the wrong type of hob.

But none of that caused the fault.


> With hindsight, I shouldn't have offered to pay for the replacement.
> The contract says that I'm responsible for maintaining the interior of
> the flat, and it just didn't seem to be worth the hassle of arguing
> for the sake of the £89 I could spend on a replacement hob from B+Q.
> But I hadn't looked at the wiring then. So should I pay for the new
> wiring required to put in a the new hob, or should the landlord?

What you need is not new wiring but a new hob that limits itself to
13A, and is designed to go on amains plug.


> Seems
> obvious to me it should be the landlord. But he insists the existiong
> wiring is fine. "Bob did it and he did the wiring for the hobs in all
> the other flats and they haven't had any problems..."
>
> So I need to convince the landlord that the wiring is not, in fact,
> fine.
>
> Duncan

No, you need to undrstand whats going on so you can move toward a
solution. If you exchange your new hob for a 13A one, there will be no
further problem.


NT

Owain

unread,
May 28, 2007, 8:20:12 AM5/28/07
to
Duncan wrote:
> A 2.5mm^2 cable into a standard double socket lying on the floor under
> the oven. A 2.5mm^2 cable wired into this outlet supplying the old hob
> (cut by cleaner). The oven was plugged into the one of teh sockets
> with a 13A plug. The oven is rated at 2400W and the new hob (which
> looks just like the old hob) is 5kW. The rating sticker on the old hob
> was melted by the fire. There is no isolator switch and the
> electrician said that the supply was a spur from the ring main.
> I have a copy of the brown on site guide and I can find places in the
> guide where the wiring doesn't meet recommendations. But is the wiring
> actually illegal, and can I make the landlord fix it? Specific refs to
> the onsite guide might help my case.

The wiring does not have to comply with current IEE regulations[1] but
it has to be safe - the landlord has a duty of care to the tenant. The
two main areas of concern would be:

1. The rating of a supply derived from a spur from a ring

2. Lack of isolation

Both of those have immediate fire safety implications and would make it
unsafe to connect a cooker IMHO.

An electrician's report that the wiring is *unsafe* such that he cannot
connect the cooker (rather than merely substandard) would appear to be
fairly conclusive that remedial work needs to be undertaken. The
landlord might argue that such work has only arisen because the cooker
has needed to be replaced.

You can't live in a house without a cooker, so if the landlord won't
agree you can:

1. do the repairs with his consent and pay the bill yourself
2. as 1, then sue the landlord through small claims. Do NOT withhold
your rent as that gives the landlord grounds for eviction
3. Get the Environmental Health or Housing (depends on how your council
is organised) to get the house declared unfit for habitation

Owain


[1] Except possibly in the case of a licensed HMO

Dan

unread,
May 28, 2007, 2:28:15 PM5/28/07
to

"Duncan" <duncan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1180353094.3...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...

> The electric hob in my rented flat burned out when no-one was there,

Really ? It switched itself on? I would contact the manufacturer.

> producing smoke from inside the hob, melting the control knobs and
> blowing a fuse at the consumer unit. The cleaner had cleaned the hob
> earlier in the day and is sure that it was switched off.

He probably knocked it whilst cleaning and will not admit it. He would have
said if YOU had left it on.

>He was also
> the first person back in the flat and he cut the cable to the hob and
> replaced the fuse.

Why on earth would a cleaner do that? If he is there to clean why is he
messing about cutting cables?

>As it is unclear what caused the fire, I (tenant)
> agreed to replace the hob at my own expense.

You don't hve much choice.

>But I refused to connect
> it because I believe the wiring is not safe, based on my recent
> research prior to having a hob installed in my own property.

That was in a different property, so nothing to do with the current one.

>I had an
> electrician inspect the landlord's wiring and comfirm in writing that
> it is sub-standard.

In what way is it substandard? Is the electrician also doing part time
cleaning or do you just want a free rewire out of the landlord?


>I've sent this to the landlord who is still
> refusing to upgrade the wiring.
>

Make your mind up, either it is substandard or it is dangerous. The
landlord will also have had it checked, so it's your friend's word against
his. Legally he doesn't have to upgrade anything providing the wiring
passes an inspection. Just because it doesn't suit you it does't matter.


> I need some advise.

Go and see a solicitor - how else will you check answers given here are
correct?

>
> This is what I found.
>

So ws it you or ompany that found this. I sense clutching at straws for a
freebie here.


> A 2.5mm^2 cable into a standard double socket lying on the floor under
> the oven.

Why would a socket be under the oven?

>A 2.5mm^2 cable wired into this outlet supplying the old hob
> (cut by cleaner).

Why did he go cutting wires?

> The oven was plugged into the one of teh sockets
> with a 13A plug.

Depends on the rating - my microwave is plugged in and that has a convection
oven.


>The oven is rated at 2400W and the new hob (which
> looks just like the old hob) is 5kW. The rating sticker on the old hob
> was melted by the fire. There is no isolator switch and the
> electrician said that the supply was a spur from the ring main.
>

I would check the electrician is correct and why with your vast knowledge
and research you didn't notice a cooker supply! The fuse would have gone
anyway.

> I have a copy of the brown on site guide and I can find places in the
> guide where the wiring doesn't meet recommendations. But is the wiring
> actually illegal, and can I make the landlord fix it? Specific refs to
> the onsite guide might help my case.
>

You're mixing up what you want and what is safe. If the wiring was safe at
the time of installation and is in good condition then no you can't have a
freebie.

> Another question, and less important, but could the wiring have caused
> or contributed to the failure of the hob itself? The electrician
> thought so, but I don't see why.
>

Your electrician is an idiot, he hasn't the first clue which is why I doubt
he is correct about an earlier point you chose to believe about the supply.

Contact the manufacturer of the hob and ask them to investigate, then remind
your cleaner not to mess with things while you are not there or go cutting
any cables for no valid reason.
Put your books away and get a QUALIFIED electrician to take a look at the
wiring before you do any more damage to it.

> many thanks,
> Duncan
>


John Rumm

unread,
May 28, 2007, 2:39:35 PM5/28/07
to
meow...@care2.com wrote:

> No, you need to undrstand whats going on so you can move toward a
> solution. If you exchange your new hob for a 13A one, there will be no
> further problem.

Aside from the naff cooking performance from a 3kW hob ;-)

meow...@care2.com

unread,
May 28, 2007, 2:51:47 PM5/28/07
to
On 28 May, 19:39, John Rumm <see.my.signat...@nowhere.null> wrote:
> meow2...@care2.com wrote:

> > No, you need to undrstand whats going on so you can move toward a
> > solution. If you exchange your new hob for a 13A one, there will be no
> > further problem.

> Aside from the naff cooking performance from a 3kW hob ;-)

I cant imagine it ever being an issue with a single person. Typically
they'll run 2 rings full power, and the 3rd & if present 4th will only
come on when the others cycle or aren't on - which is almost all the
time. I had one years ago.

Are there also ones that are 750w per ring? If there are that would be
2nd rate.

I once had a 500w one I found behind Noah's ark and it was terrible.
It was the bare live element that really put me off. Kit like that is
still standard in many countries. The former soviet union uses
electrode heating kettles... with all that condensation forming round
the top as it boils.


NT

John Rumm

unread,
May 28, 2007, 2:50:24 PM5/28/07
to
Dan wrote:

> Make your mind up, either it is substandard or it is dangerous. The

Clearly the first, possibly the second from an electrical point of view,
and clearly the second from a fire risk point of view.

> landlord will also have had it checked, so it's your friend's word against
> his. Legally he doesn't have to upgrade anything providing the wiring
> passes an inspection.

As it stands it would not pass.

>> A 2.5mm^2 cable into a standard double socket lying on the floor under
>> the oven.
>
> Why would a socket be under the oven?

Curious question. You would need to ask Bob by the sounds of it.


>> I have a copy of the brown on site guide and I can find places in the
>> guide where the wiring doesn't meet recommendations. But is the wiring
>> actually illegal, and can I make the landlord fix it? Specific refs to
>> the onsite guide might help my case.
>>
>
> You're mixing up what you want and what is safe. If the wiring was safe at

No, he is not.

> the time of installation and is in good condition then no you can't have a
> freebie.

If it was safe, then yes I agree. However it was not.

>> Another question, and less important, but could the wiring have caused
>> or contributed to the failure of the hob itself? The electrician
>> thought so, but I don't see why.
>>
>
> Your electrician is an idiot, he hasn't the first clue which is why I doubt
> he is correct about an earlier point you chose to believe about the supply.
>
> Contact the manufacturer of the hob and ask them to investigate, then remind
> your cleaner not to mess with things while you are not there or go cutting
> any cables for no valid reason.

Perhaps he cut the cable as that was the only way to isolate the hob?

> Put your books away and get a QUALIFIED electrician to take a look at the
> wiring before you do any more damage to it.

Well Dan, I think you win today's sanctimonious twat award.

robgraham

unread,
May 28, 2007, 4:04:02 PM5/28/07
to

I think I would join in the castigation of Dan in that we are here to
help one another and not to make scathing and unhelpful comments based
on the descriptions of a problem when the OP is unsure of the
technical terms or details. The OP wouldn't be asking the questions
if he knew the answers.

However one thing does bother me somewhat and that is this cutting of
the cable. How did this 'cleaner' just happen to know where this
cable was, how did he just happen to have a pair of wire cutters/
pliers, which presumably now are effectively useless as they will have
a dirty great chunk out of the blade due to the arc when the cut took
place, and why, if he had this tool and he knew where the cable was,
did he not also have the knowledge to just go and shut off the CU ?
Me thinks there is more to this 'cleaner' than meets the eye and a
considerable element of blame for the damage lies at his feet.

Rob

Dave Plowman (News)

unread,
May 28, 2007, 8:24:45 PM5/28/07
to
In article <1180378307.6...@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

<meow...@care2.com> wrote:
> > Aside from the naff cooking performance from a 3kW hob ;-)

> I cant imagine it ever being an issue with a single person. Typically
> they'll run 2 rings full power, and the 3rd & if present 4th will only
> come on when the others cycle or aren't on - which is almost all the
> time. I had one years ago.

When cooking for myself I can't remember using more than one ring - for
potatoes. All other veg goes in the microwave and meat is grilled, roasted
or casseroled. Only thing I fry is eggs.

--
*Don't use no double negatives *

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

meow...@care2.com

unread,
May 29, 2007, 4:33:21 AM5/29/07
to
On 28 May, 21:04, robgraham <robkgra...@btinternet.com> wrote:

> However one thing does bother me somewhat and that is this cutting of
> the cable. How did this 'cleaner' just happen to know where this
> cable was, how did he just happen to have a pair of wire cutters/
> pliers, which presumably now are effectively useless as they will have
> a dirty great chunk out of the blade due to the arc when the cut took
> place, and why, if he had this tool and he knew where the cable was,
> did he not also have the knowledge to just go and shut off the CU ?
> Me thinks there is more to this 'cleaner' than meets the eye and a
> considerable element of blame for the damage lies at his feet.
>
> Rob

The appliance should be safe whatever the cleaner did, within reason.
Knocking it, leaving it on etc, should not cause a fire.

When a fire breaks out, people panic. Maybe he tugged on the wire, the
plug didnt become accessible, so he cut it quick to stop the fire
spreading. Reality is we dont know. However, the landlord is still the
one responsible for sorting it out, so its the landlord the tenant
needs to deal with.


NT

Duncan

unread,
May 29, 2007, 4:37:43 AM5/29/07
to
On May 28, 7:28 pm, "Dan" <D...@spamonline.net> wrote:
> "Duncan" <duncan.gr...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>
> news:1180353094.3...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > The electric hob in my rented flat burned out when no-one was there,
>
> Really ? It switched itself on? I would contact the manufacturer.

It was either left on by me, switched on by the cleaner, or failed
spontaneously. The cleaner is convinced it was off when he left and he
was the person who discovered the fire later in the day (presumably
while cleaning the other flats). I don't really care - I offered to
replace the hob to avoid arguing about who was to blame.

> Why on earth would a cleaner do that? If he is there to clean why is he
> messing about cutting cables?

To stop the fire? He is provided by the landlord and I guess he also
takes on general care-taker role. He is not "Bob", the landlord's
"electrician".


> >I had an
> > electrician inspect the landlord's wiring and comfirm in writing that
> > it is sub-standard.
>
> In what way is it substandard? Is the electrician also doing part time
> cleaning or do you just want a free rewire out of the landlord?

you're confused. Sorry if my question was unclear. I couldn't care
less about the wiring as long as it is safe. I just want to be able to
cook.

> Legally he doesn't have to upgrade anything providing the wiring
> passes an inspection.

How do I arrange such an inspection?


> > This is what I found.
>
> So ws it you or ompany that found this. I sense clutching at straws for a
> freebie here.

Again, I'm sorry you don't understand my original post. I was
intending to connect the new hob to the existing wiring myself until I
saw the wiring and thought it might be unsafe to do so. The
electrician I hired also declined to connect the hob.

> > A 2.5mm^2 cable into a standard double socket lying on the floor under
> > the oven.
>
> Why would a socket be under the oven?

Quite. one of the things that bothered me too. It wasn't mounted, just
sitting there.


> >A 2.5mm^2 cable wired into this outlet supplying the old hob
> > (cut by cleaner).
>
> Why did he go cutting wires?

To prevent a fire, presumably.


>
> > The oven was plugged into the one of teh sockets
> > with a 13A plug.
>
> Depends on the rating - my microwave is plugged in and that has a convection
> oven.

I know. No problem with the oven alone.


>
> >The oven is rated at 2400W and the new hob (which
> > looks just like the old hob) is 5kW. The rating sticker on the old hob
> > was melted by the fire. There is no isolator switch and the
> > electrician said that the supply was a spur from the ring main.
>
> I would check the electrician is correct and why with your vast knowledge
> and research you didn't notice a cooker supply! The fuse would have gone
> anyway.

I don't understand this comment (apart from the sarcasm). There is one
supply, to the socket I told you about, that supplied the oven and the
hob. The electrician said that it was a spur. How would I know that
it's a spur simply by looking at the wire coming out of the wall?

> You're mixing up what you want and what is safe. If the wiring was safe at
> the time of installation and is in good condition then no you can't have a
> freebie.

I'm asking whether it is safe.

> Put your books away and get a QUALIFIED electrician to take a look at the
> wiring before you do any more damage to it.

I hired a QUALIFIED electrician (the one you just called an idiot).
The landlord won't accept his written notification of sub-standard
wiring. I haven't altered the wiring myself, only looked at it.

Thanks for your excellent advice (returning sarcasm).

Duncan

zikkim...@connectfree.co.uk

unread,
May 29, 2007, 5:32:25 AM5/29/07
to
On 29 May, 09:37, Duncan <duncan.gr...@gmail.com> wrote:

<A question about hob wiring>

Firstly, IANAE

It looks like the options are as follows.....

1. Pay to get it installed right.

2. Pay to get it installed right and then sue the Landlord (probably
cost you more than 1 and be an expensive option)

3. Move

4. Eat only meals prepared in microwave/oven

5. Get Bob to reconnect it

6. Reconnect it yourself, better than it was, but not in line with
current regs and use it carefully.

I wouldn't recommend doing this, but if I was going to do it, I would
run a separate spur off the ring to a small enclosure and fit a 16A
MCB in in an accessible location.

I know of an installation where a couple of air conditioning units
(one per ring!)were installed like this by an "Electrician" and they
worked fine, and the building is still there..


Mogga

unread,
May 29, 2007, 6:56:01 AM5/29/07
to
On 29 May 2007 01:37:43 -0700, Duncan <duncan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On May 28, 7:28 pm, "Dan" <D...@spamonline.net> wrote:
>> "Duncan" <duncan.gr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1180353094.3...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > The electric hob in my rented flat burned out when no-one was there,
>>
>> Really ? It switched itself on? I would contact the manufacturer.
>
>It was either left on by me, switched on by the cleaner, or failed
>spontaneously. The cleaner is convinced it was off when he left and he
>was the person who discovered the fire later in the day (presumably
>while cleaning the other flats). I don't really care - I offered to
>replace the hob to avoid arguing about who was to blame.

Do you leave the house and the cleaner comes in?
Does the cleaner clean and then go, then you leave home?

I know its probably not what you want to think about but the cleaner
may well have caused this incident. If they clean other flats in the
property then are they employed by the landlord?

I've heard dreadful reports about cleaners who basically live in your
flat during the day and then leave shortly before you get home.

John Rumm

unread,
May 29, 2007, 7:48:03 AM5/29/07
to
zikkim...@connectfree.co.uk wrote:

> 2. Pay to get it installed right and then sue the Landlord (probably
> cost you more than 1 and be an expensive option)

Not if you use the online service. Costs £30 for the application (which
is added to the claim anyway), so if you win it costs nothing.

https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/csmco2/index.jsp

To the OP:

Clearly your current situation is not acceptable. So you need action of
some sort. You could write to the landlord requesting he make good the
work as a matter of urgency. I would include a copy of the report from
your sparks that detailed why the current installation is sub standard.
Also state that you would like to see the test and inspection report by
his electrician after the work is complete. Point out that if he fails
to act within a reasonable time (specify a reasonable time frame - 7
days would seem adequate since the flat is not habitable without cooking
facilities). State that if no action is taken you will have the work
completed yourself by a professional electrician and seek to recover the
costs from him.

If he does nothing (probably your best result) get a sparks in to do it
correctly. Send a copy of the bill to the landlord with a letter stating
he has 14 days to pay.

If he does not respond to that, send a reminder saying he has a final
seven days to pay, and that the consequence of ignoring the letter will
be legal action. Wait seven days, if nothing happens fill in the small
claims application on the web site and follow the instructions. You then
have a strongly defensible position, and a paper trail. if he fails to
respond to the court then he loses by default.

David Hansen

unread,
May 29, 2007, 8:00:53 AM5/29/07
to
On 29 May 2007 01:37:43 -0700 someone who may be Duncan
<duncan...@gmail.com> wrote this:-

>> Why on earth would a cleaner do that? If he is there to clean why is he
>> messing about cutting cables?
>
>To stop the fire? He is provided by the landlord and I guess he also
>takes on general care-taker role. He is not "Bob", the landlord's
>"electrician".

There should be a switch within a couple of metres to turn off the
hob. That fault should be rectified before anyone connects the new
hob.

The cleaner just happened to have cutters to cut an electric cable?
Hmmm. And the cleaner cut a presumably live cable? Hmmm.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Peter Ashby

unread,
May 29, 2007, 8:20:54 AM5/29/07
to
Duncan <duncan...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 28, 7:28 pm, "Dan" <D...@spamonline.net> wrote:
> > "Duncan" <duncan.gr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1180353094.3...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > > The electric hob in my rented flat burned out when no-one was there,
> >
> > Really ? It switched itself on? I would contact the manufacturer.
>
> It was either left on by me, switched on by the cleaner, or failed
> spontaneously. The cleaner is convinced it was off when he left and he
> was the person who discovered the fire later in the day (presumably
> while cleaning the other flats). I don't really care - I offered to
> replace the hob to avoid arguing about who was to blame.
>
> > Why on earth would a cleaner do that? If he is there to clean why is he
> > messing about cutting cables?
>
> To stop the fire? He is provided by the landlord and I guess he also
> takes on general care-taker role. He is not "Bob", the landlord's
> "electrician".

I think that since the hob was damaged by an employee of the landlord
then your liability is nil. If the cleaner was employed by you the
situation would be different, but as it stands it is the landlord's
problem. I would think that on that basis you would have a good chance
in the small claims court. The cleaner's actions it seems to me had
nothing to do with protecting you and everything to do with protecting
him and his employer. Don't let them get away with expecting you to foot
the bill.

An agent of the landlord has deprived you of cooking facilities and he
(the landlord) is thus responsible for replacing them, not you. It
cannot be your fault since you were not in the flat at the time. Open
and shut.

Peter
--
Add my middle initial to email me. It has become attached to a country
www.the-brights.net

Lobster

unread,
May 30, 2007, 6:07:51 AM5/30/07
to
Peter Ashby wrote:

> An agent of the landlord has deprived you of cooking facilities and he
> (the landlord) is thus responsible for replacing them, not you. It
> cannot be your fault since you were not in the flat at the time. Open
> and shut.

Would have been, but I suspect that the courts may view the OP's
purchase of a replacement hob as some sort of admission of liability.
At the very least it will have clouded the waters.

David

tom.ha...@gmail.com

unread,
May 30, 2007, 7:28:22 AM5/30/07
to
On 28 May, 18:50, John Rumm <see.my.signat...@nowhere.null> wrote:

>
> However a 5kW point load on the ring from the hob is not desirable. It
> may or may not be dangerous (the ring is designed to supply up to 7.6 kW
> of power in total, but the design expects the load to be distributed
> around the ring).

Are you sure? According to the regs, the load on any part of a ring
must be unlikely to exceed for long periods the rating of the cable. I
don't think it is safe to assume that rating to be >20A. This means
that rings are rated at 4.8kW total.

T

meow...@care2.com

unread,
May 30, 2007, 8:35:30 AM5/30/07
to

2 cables in parallel, not one.
Hob is not a continuous load anyway, its intermittent.


NT

Dave Plowman (News)

unread,
May 30, 2007, 8:22:18 AM5/30/07
to
In article <1180524502.7...@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,

<tom.ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are you sure? According to the regs, the load on any part of a ring
> must be unlikely to exceed for long periods the rating of the cable. I
> don't think it is safe to assume that rating to be >20A. This means
> that rings are rated at 4.8kW total.

The purpose of a fuse or MCB etc in the CU is to protect the wiring from
damage through fault or overload. Rings use 32 amps MCBs for this purpose,
so regardless of taking 230 or 240 volts as the working voltage that makes
the safe total working load approx 7.5 Kw. In practice you can load them
slightly higher than this if the loads are applied incrementally, with no
ill effects other than slight voltage drop. To have any real chance of a
fire, etc, on a well installed ring with tight well made connections, you
could probably more than double this figure. In other words, as with all
domestic wiring, there is a large safety factor built in.

--
*Why is it that rain drops but snow falls?

Tony Bryer

unread,
May 30, 2007, 10:16:18 AM5/30/07
to
On 30 May 2007 05:35:30 -0700 wrote :
> 2 cables in parallel, not one.

Depending on where this is in the ring you might have one 5m and one
25m leg with the current flows being proportionate

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

tom.ha...@gmail.com

unread,
May 30, 2007, 9:44:18 AM5/30/07
to

The regs are quite clear, that if the load on _any_ part of the ring
is likely to exceed the cable rating, _all_ of the ring is non-
compliant. People tend to get confused by rings, thinking that
doubling up the wire doubles the capacity. In general it does not.
Someone is likely to pipe up that under certain circumstances you can
ensure (so long as no circuit modifications are made in the future)
that a particular ring can cope with 32A. That is not the point.

T.

Dave Plowman (News)

unread,
May 30, 2007, 10:04:14 AM5/30/07
to
In article <1180532658.1...@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

<tom.ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The regs are quite clear, that if the load on _any_ part of the ring
> is likely to exceed the cable rating, _all_ of the ring is non-
> compliant.

Define load. Fixed as via an FCU. Continuous or peak? Define the cable
rating. At the point where the load is applied? Elsewhere?

--
*If you think this van is dirty, you should try having sex with the driver*

John Rumm

unread,
May 30, 2007, 10:58:59 AM5/30/07
to

Not quite sure I follow... you seem to be saying what I just said, at
the same time as querying it.

Rings are protected at 7.6 kW with the assumption that the load is
diverse and distributed round the ring. The regulation to which I think
you allude is [433-02-04] (copy at end). which basically says the
minimum cable size is 2.5mm^2 (MICC excepted), and the particular
installation conditions should leave it with at least 20A nominal
capacity, and that the load in any part of the ring is should not exceed
that nominal capacity for long periods. Note the word "part" - it does
not say the total load on the ring as a whole must not exceed 20A.

As I said in my post, a 5kW point load does exceed what is a reasonable
point load, while it is diverse, it is still not the sort of load for
which the ring was designed. It is probably highly inappropriate that it
is connected as it is.

However there is a reasonable chance that the installation will be
"safe" (even if a long way from best practice) in the sense the cables
are unlikely to overheat. This is assuming the load is not too close to
one end or the other. The nature of the load (i.e. thermostatic control,
and a low likelihood of using all rings together at full power) is also
such that you may never notice a problem even if it were close to one
end. At least until you try cooking Christmas dinner for the whole family.

So all in all not a good situation, especially the lack of isolation
facility, which is a serious fault, and a fire risk.


Test of the regulation in question:

"433-02-04 For a ring final circuit protected by a 30 A or 32 A
protective device complying with BS 88, BS 1361, BS 3036, BS EN 60898,
BS EN 60947-2 or BS EN 61009-1 (RCBO) and supplying accessories to BS
1363 and wired with copper conductors, the minimum cross-sectional area
of both phase and neutral conductors is 2.5 mm2 except for two-core
mineral insulated cables to BS 6207 or BS EN 60702-1 for which the
minimum is 1.5 mm2.
Such ring final circuits are deemed to meet the requirements of
Regulation 433-02-01 if the current-carrying capacity (Iz) of the cable
is not less than 20 A, and if, under the intended conditions of use, the
load current in any part of the ring is unlikely to exceed for long
periods the current-carrying capacity (Iz) of the cable."

tom.ha...@gmail.com

unread,
May 30, 2007, 12:05:01 PM5/30/07
to
On 30 May, 15:58, John Rumm <see.my.signat...@nowhere.null> wrote:

> tom.harri...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On 28 May, 18:50, John Rumm <see.my.signat...@nowhere.null> wrote:
>
> >> However a 5kW point load on the ring from the hob is not desirable. It
> >> may or may not be dangerous (the ring is designed to supply up to 7.6 kW
> >> of power in total, but the design expects the load to be distributed
> >> around the ring).
>
> > Are you sure? According to the regs, the load on any part of a ring
> > must be unlikely to exceed for long periods the rating of the cable. I
> > don't think it is safe to assume that rating to be >20A. This means
> > that rings are rated at 4.8kW total.
>
> Not quite sure I follow... you seem to be saying what I just said, at
> the same time as querying it.
>

The capacity of a ring circuit is, in general, the cable capacity,
just like any other circuit. It is not, in general, 7.6kW as you
suggest.

> that nominal capacity for long periods. Note the word "part" - it does
> not say the total load on the ring as a whole must not exceed 20A.
>

Precisely. If any _part_ exceeds 20A load, the whole circuit is non-
compliant. This is for safety reasons. It is an additional constraint
applied only to rings, to cope with the fact that in general, rings
are not protected in the same way as radials.


> However there is a reasonable chance that the installation will be
> "safe" (even if a long way from best practice) in the sense the cables
> are unlikely to overheat.

A reasonable chance it is safe? I'll let others draw their own
conclusions.

T.


John Rumm

unread,
May 30, 2007, 2:08:32 PM5/30/07
to
tom.ha...@gmail.com wrote:

> The capacity of a ring circuit is, in general, the cable capacity,
> just like any other circuit. It is not, in general, 7.6kW as you
> suggest.

Might I draw your attention to:

473-01-07 Where a single device protects conductors in parallel sharing
currents equally, the value of Iz to be used in Regulation 433-02 is the
sum of the current-carrying capacities of the various conductors.

It is deemed that current sharing is equal if the requirements of the
second paragraph of Regulation 523-02-01 are satisfied.

(section 523-02-01 begins "Except for ring final circuits," and so can
be ignored)

If you want the true capacity of the circuit to be limited to the
*single* cable capacity then you may as well protect it at 20A. In which
case you may as well make it a radial. Your suggestion seems to suggest
that there is no point in using a ring circuit, since it cannot serve a
greater power provision.

The capacity (in the sense I mean) *is* defined by the MCB rating, since
that is what the ring will supply. The design is such that it is
acceptable to load it to that limit, so long as we are talking about
diverse loads (i.e. *non* continuous), and they are distributed around
the ring (i.e. not high point loads).

>> that nominal capacity for long periods. Note the word "part" - it does
>> not say the total load on the ring as a whole must not exceed 20A.

My understanding here is different to yours then.

> Precisely. If any _part_ exceeds 20A load, the whole circuit is non-
> compliant. This is for safety reasons. It is an additional constraint
> applied only to rings, to cope with the fact that in general, rings
> are not protected in the same way as radials.

Yup agree with that. If you proposed a standard 32A ring knowing that it
was going to have a fixed 26A load on it that may be "on" for long
durations (e.g. underfloor heating - could run at full load for a couple
of hours getting up to temperature), then your ring would not not meet
regulations for the reasons you cite.

However you can have three 10A loads on a ring evenly spread. Total load
7.2 kW, max current in any cable 15A. Hence compliant with the
requirements. What is more, even if the loads were continuous, in this
circumstance no damage would occur to the circuit, all cables would run
below maximum temperature.

>> However there is a reasonable chance that the installation will be
>> "safe" (even if a long way from best practice) in the sense the cables
>> are unlikely to overheat.
>
> A reasonable chance it is safe? I'll let others draw their own
> conclusions.

Yes let them conclude away.

You have two cables with a method 1 current capacity of 27A. We don't
know the installation method, but unless we are talking about a super
insulated modern building we are probably not going to be far from that.
The point load that *may* be near the middle of the ring, again we don't
know. A load that diversity calculations for cookers tells us can be
treated as a 16A load. You do the math.

As I said a "reasonable chance". This was an educated guess based on the
above, plus the knowledge that "Bob" had wired all the other flats in
the same way, and none, as far as we are aware, has barbecued its
tenants yet.

For the avoidance of doubt, let me re-iterate. The installation as
described by the OP is substandard. It would not pass inspection, it is
dangerous in a number of respects. Causing damage to its supply cables
by overheating, all by itself is relatively unlikely although possible
if the ring is heavily loaded elsewhere.

Dave Plowman (News)

unread,
May 30, 2007, 2:38:42 PM5/30/07
to
In article <1180541101.0...@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,

<tom.ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Precisely. If any _part_ exceeds 20A load, the whole circuit is non-
> compliant. This is for safety reasons. It is an additional constraint
> applied only to rings, to cope with the fact that in general, rings
> are not protected in the same way as radials.

Sorry, but you're talking bollocks. The total continuous load allowed is
that of the circuit protection device.

> > However there is a reasonable chance that the installation will be
> > "safe" (even if a long way from best practice) in the sense the cables
> > are unlikely to overheat.

> A reasonable chance it is safe? I'll let others draw their own
> conclusions.

You seem to dislike rings. If so don't use them. Then look at the crap
that occurs in other countries *in practice*

--
*If work is so terrific, how come they have to pay you to do it?

Ed Sirett

unread,
May 30, 2007, 4:22:21 PM5/30/07
to
On Mon, 28 May 2007 04:51:34 -0700, Duncan wrote:

> The electric hob in my rented flat burned out when no-one was there,

> producing smoke from inside the hob, melting the control knobs and
> blowing a fuse at the consumer unit. The cleaner had cleaned the hob

> earlier in the day and is sure that it was switched off. He was also


> the first person back in the flat and he cut the cable to the hob and

> replaced the fuse. As it is unclear what caused the fire, I (tenant)
> agreed to replace the hob at my own expense. But I refused to connect


> it because I believe the wiring is not safe, based on my recent

> research prior to having a hob installed in my own property. I had an


> electrician inspect the landlord's wiring and comfirm in writing that

> it is sub-standard. I've sent this to the landlord who is still


> refusing to upgrade the wiring.

>
> I need some advise.


>
> This is what I found.
>

> A 2.5mm^2 cable into a standard double socket lying on the floor under

> the oven. A 2.5mm^2 cable wired into this outlet supplying the old hob
> (cut by cleaner). The oven was plugged into the one of teh sockets
> with a 13A plug. The oven is rated at 2400W and the new hob (which


> looks just like the old hob) is 5kW. The rating sticker on the old hob
> was melted by the fire. There is no isolator switch and the
> electrician said that the supply was a spur from the ring main.
>

> I have a copy of the brown on site guide and I can find places in the
> guide where the wiring doesn't meet recommendations. But is the wiring
> actually illegal, and can I make the landlord fix it? Specific refs to
> the onsite guide might help my case.
>

> Another question, and less important, but could the wiring have caused
> or contributed to the failure of the hob itself? The electrician
> thought so, but I don't see why.
>

> many thanks,
> Duncan

The hob should not have caught fire under any circumstances, a good
landlord would WANT to make everything safe.
I think we will have to give the Landlord the benefit of the doubt that
the hob incident was you/your cleaner's fault.

I know of no 4 plate hobs which have a load of less than 13A and indeed
the new one is rated at more than 20A. Even allowing for diversity the
load exceeds 13A and so is unsuitable for connecting to a 32A/30A ring
final circuit. Whilst there is little chance of the circuit as described
actually catching fire it is irregular and therefore should not be.
This is not a new standard. This circuit would have been irregular 1947
just as much as 2007.

There is also the fact that a cooking appliance needs an isolator. Whilst
an oven alone frequently does not have such a switch a hob should always
have one.

There is no compulsion for landlords to have a wiring
inspection/certificate but the better letting agencies usually insist to
keep themselves in the clear.

Keep paying the rent. Ask the Landlord if he wants to fix the wiring, or
will let you do it (rather kind of you). If he is obstinate then you may
need to bring the force of law down on him.

I expect that a full inspection will turn up a lot of minor (and perhaps
some not so minor) irregularities.


--
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
Choosing a Boiler FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/BoilerChoice.html
Gas Fitting Standards Docs here: http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFittingStandards

Peter Ashby

unread,
May 30, 2007, 4:59:23 PM5/30/07
to
Lobster <davidlobs...@hotmail.com> wrote:

True, that was a mistake.

Duncan

unread,
May 30, 2007, 5:29:14 PM5/30/07
to
Buying the new hob was a mistake, but was done in good faith. I
intended to avoid a confrontation with a confrontational landlord over
a trivial sum (for the new hob). I agree that the most likely
explanation is that the cleaner started the fire, but I like him and
he works hard and I don't want to start accusing people without proof.
Anyway, whatever the cause of the fire, it is clear that the wiring
needs to be sorted before the new hob can be installed.

So I've reported the problem to the council's environmental health
dept, who also deal with dangerous buildings. Surprisingly, perhaps,
they were very helpful and say they will arrange to inspect the
wiring. If they find it faulty they can force landlord to repair it.

I'll keep you posted. Many thanks to the people who commented on the
electrical installation issues and helpfully suggested possible
solutions to my situation.

Duncan

meow...@care2.com

unread,
May 30, 2007, 7:34:24 PM5/30/07
to
On 30 May, 15:16, Tony Bryer <t...@delme.sda.co.uk> wrote:
> On 30 May 2007 05:35:30 -0700 wrote :

> > 2 cables in parallel, not one.

> Depending on where this is in the ring you might have one 5m and one
> 25m leg with the current flows being proportionate

Of course, but the reuslting ampacity is always greater than one cable
alone. By how much varies round the ring.

I could be awkward and point out that as the cable warms up its R
rises, improving current sharing. Not sure how much difference that
makes though, probably a sixth of a hapenny.

Also rings are 30 or 32A continuous, not peak. Peak loads can be far
higher in practice, a ring supplying 45A is normal and common, just
doesnt go on for long.


NT

John Rumm

unread,
May 30, 2007, 10:30:07 PM5/30/07
to
meow...@care2.com wrote:

> I could be awkward and point out that as the cable warms up its R
> rises, improving current sharing. Not sure how much difference that
> makes though, probably a sixth of a hapenny.

It is not that insignificant. If you look at Table 4D2B in the OSG,

then compare with:

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Electrical_Circuit_faults#Wire_resistance_table

2.5mm^2 rises from 7.41 mOhms/meter to 18 mOhms/meter, so that lengthens
the effective length of the (hot) short leg by almost 2.5 times.

David Hansen

unread,
May 31, 2007, 2:45:02 AM5/31/07
to
On 30 May 2007 09:05:01 -0700 someone who may be
tom.ha...@gmail.com wrote this:-

>I'll let others draw their own conclusions.

Since you asked I will do so. John is correct.

David Hansen

unread,
May 31, 2007, 2:47:56 AM5/31/07
to
On Wed, 30 May 2007 19:08:32 +0100 someone who may be John Rumm
<see.my.s...@nowhere.null> wrote this:-

>A load that diversity calculations for cookers tells us can be
>treated as a 16A load.

A 16A circuit breaker is the maximum size of protective device for
connecting a fixed load to a standard ring circuit. However, I still
wouldn't connect this hob to the ring without knowing a lot more
about the circuit and how it was to be used.

tom.ha...@gmail.com

unread,
May 31, 2007, 3:49:57 AM5/31/07
to
On 30 May, 19:08, John Rumm <see.my.signat...@nowhere.null> wrote:

> tom.harri...@gmail.com wrote:
> > The capacity of a ring circuit is, in general, the cable capacity,
> > just like any other circuit. It is not, in general, 7.6kW as you
> > suggest.
>
> Might I draw your attention to:
>
> 473-01-07 Where a single device protects conductors in parallel sharing
> currents equally, the value of Iz to be used in Regulation 433-02 is the
> sum of the current-carrying capacities of the various conductors.
>

You confuse a ring with conductors in parallel. Ponder why rings are
not "rated" at 40A for a clue as to the difference.

>
> If you want the true capacity of the circuit to be limited to the
> *single* cable capacity then you may as well protect it at 20A. In which
> case you may as well make it a radial. Your suggestion seems to suggest
> that there is no point in using a ring circuit, since it cannot serve a
> greater power provision.

The regs are crystal clear on the 20A issue. I have been crystal clear
that a particular ring can be designed to run quite happily at 32A. In
general, the only way to ensure that a the current capacity of the
cable is not exceeded on any part of the ring, is to ensure it is not
exceeded by the ring as a whole under intended conditions of use. A
"point load" as you put it, of 5kW would only be acceptable, even to
someone who likes to take risks, under certain conditions.

You are fully aware of the extra caveats applied to rings so that they
may be "deemed"* to comply with regulations that require co-ordination
between cable and protective device. These constraints are by their
nature all to easy to circumvent through use or modification.

*Interesting choice of words.

T.

tom.ha...@gmail.com

unread,
May 31, 2007, 4:14:50 AM5/31/07
to
On 30 May, 19:38, "Dave Plowman (News)" <d...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> You seem to dislike rings. If so don't use them. Then look at the crap
> that occurs in other countries *in practice*
>
> --
> *If work is so terrific, how come they have to pay you to do it?
>
> Dave Plowman d...@davenoise.co.uk London SW

> To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Sorry, I forgot the all-defeating Johny-Foreigner argument. You have
totally convinced me by the might of your intellect and my repressed
xenophobia that you are right. I've also been told that they don't
wash either!
Filthy evil radial circuited foreign b*st*rds!!!

In all my jingoistic euphoria, I seem to have lost track of what I'm
agreeing to. No matter, so long as it's not foreign crap.

T

John Rumm

unread,
May 31, 2007, 4:27:42 AM5/31/07
to
David Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2007 19:08:32 +0100 someone who may be John Rumm
> <see.my.s...@nowhere.null> wrote this:-
>
>> A load that diversity calculations for cookers tells us can be
>> treated as a 16A load.
>
> A 16A circuit breaker is the maximum size of protective device for
> connecting a fixed load to a standard ring circuit. However, I still
> wouldn't connect this hob to the ring without knowing a lot more
> about the circuit and how it was to be used.

I don't think I would connect it at all. The number of ways it could
come a bite you later are too great.

meow...@care2.com

unread,
May 31, 2007, 4:54:59 AM5/31/07
to
On 31 May, 03:30, John Rumm <see.my.signat...@nowhere.null> wrote:
> meow2...@care2.com wrote:

> > I could be awkward and point out that as the cable warms up its R
> > rises, improving current sharing. Not sure how much difference that
> > makes though, probably a sixth of a hapenny.
>
> It is not that insignificant. If you look at Table 4D2B in the OSG,
>
> then compare with:
>

> http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Electrical_Circuit_faults#W...


>
> 2.5mm^2 rises from 7.41 mOhms/meter to 18 mOhms/meter, so that lengthens
> the effective length of the (hot) short leg by almost 2.5 times.

Never realised it would make so much difference. The whole ring thing
was quite a clever idea.


NT

John Rumm

unread,
May 31, 2007, 5:05:55 AM5/31/07
to
tom.ha...@gmail.com wrote:

>> Might I draw your attention to:
>>
>> 473-01-07 Where a single device protects conductors in parallel sharing
>> currents equally, the value of Iz to be used in Regulation 433-02 is the
>> sum of the current-carrying capacities of the various conductors.
>>
>
> You confuse a ring with conductors in parallel. Ponder why rings are
> not "rated" at 40A for a clue as to the difference.

A ring final circuit is treated as a circuit which has conductors in
parallel. If that were not the case, then you would have no need for
statements such as "Except for a ring final circuit where spurs are
allowed" in 473-01-06

>> If you want the true capacity of the circuit to be limited to the
>> *single* cable capacity then you may as well protect it at 20A. In which
>> case you may as well make it a radial. Your suggestion seems to suggest
>> that there is no point in using a ring circuit, since it cannot serve a
>> greater power provision.
>
> The regs are crystal clear on the 20A issue.

Agreed.

It is your interpretation that this implies the long term load of the
whole circuit must be limited to 20A, that I was disagreeing with.

> I have been crystal clear
> that a particular ring can be designed to run quite happily at 32A.

You have? A while ago you were saying 20A was the limit.

> In
> general, the only way to ensure that a the current capacity of the
> cable is not exceeded on any part of the ring, is to ensure it is not
> exceeded by the ring as a whole under intended conditions of use.

I already gave you an example of how you can load a circuit to 30A and
not exceed 20A in any cable. In reality this will by a typical pattern
of loading for most general purpose ring circuits - multiple loads
spread around the ring. If you know you are designing for a different
load pattern, then you would choose your circuit differently as well.

> A
> "point load" as you put it, of 5kW would only be acceptable, even to
> someone who likes to take risks, under certain conditions.

We seem to be in agreement on these points.

I think you will find I said that a point load of 5kW was unacceptable.
This was one of the reasons I told the OP that the configuration he has
was sub standard. I also explained why with certain prerequisite
conditions being met, this load would be unlikely to cause damage in
practice.

Dave Plowman (News)

unread,
May 31, 2007, 5:06:11 AM5/31/07
to
In article <1180599290....@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,

<tom.ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You seem to dislike rings. If so don't use them. Then look at the crap
> > that occurs in other countries *in practice*

> Sorry, I forgot the all-defeating Johny-Foreigner argument. You have


> totally convinced me by the might of your intellect and my repressed
> xenophobia that you are right. I've also been told that they don't
> wash either!
> Filthy evil radial circuited foreign b*st*rds!!!

> In all my jingoistic euphoria, I seem to have lost track of what I'm
> agreeing to. No matter, so long as it's not foreign crap.

You are entitled to read it that way, but since domestically rings are
general in the UK and radials not one has to look elsewhere for examples
of what can happen in practice with them. And I can assure you I'm not
xenophobic.

The your tone of reply to my post suggests you're not from the UK and the
content of your others suggests you know f**k all about rings.

--
*Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm *

Dave Plowman da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW

John Rumm

unread,
May 31, 2007, 5:19:24 AM5/31/07
to

Indeed, what many dismiss as simply a way to save copper, has evolved
into a quite subtle and sophisticated bit of engineering design.

Ben Blaukopf

unread,
May 31, 2007, 5:48:25 AM5/31/07
to
That's how a lightbulb works. If you measure the resistance when cold,
you conclude that it will end up carring a large current, and will
therefore promptly blow. However, by the time it would have blown, it's
heated up, and consequently carrying less current. It never carries the
large current anyway, because current doesn't start flowing instantly -
there's a rampup time due to inductance that I ought to remember from
A-level physics, but don't...

Dave Plowman (News)

unread,
May 31, 2007, 5:43:58 AM5/31/07
to
In article <465e932f$0$8747$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>,

John Rumm <see.my.s...@nowhere.null> wrote:
> > Never realised it would make so much difference. The whole ring thing
> > was quite a clever idea.

> Indeed, what many dismiss as simply a way to save copper, has evolved
> into a quite subtle and sophisticated bit of engineering design.

Indeed. And in practice for a domestic environment has proved useful in a
way the original design can't have forecast.

--
*I will always cherish the initial misconceptions I had about you

David Hansen

unread,
May 31, 2007, 6:12:05 AM5/31/07
to
On Thu, 31 May 2007 09:27:42 +0100 someone who may be John Rumm
<see.my.s...@nowhere.null> wrote this:-

>> A 16A circuit breaker is the maximum size of protective device for


>> connecting a fixed load to a standard ring circuit. However, I still
>> wouldn't connect this hob to the ring without knowing a lot more
>> about the circuit and how it was to be used.
>
>I don't think I would connect it at all. The number of ways it could
>come a bite you later are too great.

There might be one or two circumstances in which it would be
acceptable, but not many. A lightly loaded circuit in an office
where the hob is just going to be used to warm up food for one or
two people might be one of these, though something like Baby Belling
plugged into a socket would be far more sensible.

My greatest concern would actually be whether the diversity
calculation was adequate to avoid nuisance trips in the particular
circumstances of the hob and its use. Such trips might encourage
someone to "upgrade" the circuit breaker.

David Hansen

unread,
May 31, 2007, 6:17:08 AM5/31/07
to
On Thu, 31 May 2007 10:06:11 +0100 someone who may be "Dave Plowman
(News)" <da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote this:-

>You are entitled to read it that way, but since domestically rings are
>general in the UK and radials not one has to look elsewhere for examples
>of what can happen in practice with them. And I can assure you I'm not
>xenophobic.

AOL.

As I was born elsewhere, I think my lack of xenophobia can be taken
for granted. It used to be the case that wiring in the UK was better
than one found in north western Europe while plumbing was worse.
Plumbing has been much improved since the 1960s and is now
equivalent to that found elsewhere. Wiring remains superior, though
the gap is less than it was. The ring final circuit with fused plugs
is a superb design.

manat...@hotmail.com

unread,
May 31, 2007, 7:48:08 AM5/31/07
to
On May 31, 10:48 am, Ben Blaukopf <ben-nos...@blaukopf.com> wrote:
> A-level physics, but don't...- Hide quoted text -
>

A bit OT but car tail light bulbs have been used as short circuit
protection in model railways. If too much current flows the bulb gets
hot, glows and limits the current. If the track is sectioned with each
section feed having it's own bulb then you also get a visual
indication of which section the short is located in.

MBQ

Dave Plowman (News)

unread,
May 31, 2007, 10:04:43 AM5/31/07
to
In article <1180612088.3...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,

manat...@hotmail.com <manat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> A bit OT but car tail light bulbs have been used as short circuit
> protection in model railways. If too much current flows the bulb gets
> hot, glows and limits the current. If the track is sectioned with each
> section feed having it's own bulb then you also get a visual
> indication of which section the short is located in.

It's also a cheap way of protecting expensive loudspeakers if the kids
have a party. ;-)

--
*Taxation WITH representation ain't much fun, either.

Duncan

unread,
Jun 27, 2007, 7:43:42 AM6/27/07
to
For the sake of those who find this thread in the future, this is what
happened.

I spoke to environmental health at Camden council, who arranged with
me to inspect the wiring, and I informed the landlord of the
inspection date. This prompted the landlord to send round a real
electrician, who installed a new radial circuit (with isolating
switches) to supply the hob and oven. The electrician also did some
other work, presumably to bring other (Bob installed?) parts of the
wiring in the flat into compliance. This included decommissioning a
very old extraction fan, and moving a wall-mounted heater in the
bathroom away from the bath. I'm satisfied that the new wiring in my
flat is safe, and now I have a functioning hob again. But the council
are now interested in inspecting the wiring in the other flats in the
building. So I think the landlord is facing some big bills but I'm not
very sympathetic, given the way that he's treated me.

thanks again for the help I got from people on this group.

Duncan

tony sayer

unread,
Jun 27, 2007, 8:06:57 AM6/27/07
to
In article <1182944622.5...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
Duncan <duncan...@gmail.com> writes
Old proverb..

.."Squeakiest hinge gets most Oil"..
--
Tony Sayer

AT

unread,
Jun 27, 2007, 1:39:02 PM6/27/07
to

"Duncan" <duncan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182944622.5...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Expect an increase in rent soon, he'll probably want revenge and
compensation.

AT


John Rumm

unread,
Jun 27, 2007, 1:46:58 PM6/27/07
to
Duncan wrote:

> For the sake of those who find this thread in the future, this is what
> happened.

Thanks for the update. Glad it turned out ok in the end.

How long did he leave you without cooking facilities? (might be worth a
claim for some rent back!)

Owain

unread,
Jun 27, 2007, 3:38:41 PM6/27/07
to
Duncan wrote:
> ... But the council

> are now interested in inspecting the wiring in the other flats in the
> building. So I think the landlord is facing some big bills but I'm not
> very sympathetic, given the way that he's treated me.

Excellent.

Bear in mind you may have prevented another tenant getting electrocuted
or killed in a fire.

Owain

ST

unread,
Jun 29, 2007, 4:09:54 AM6/29/07
to
On May 28, 1:20 pm, Owain <owain47...@stirlingcity.coo.uk> wrote:
<snip>
> You can't live in a house without a cooker, so if the landlord won't
> agree you can:
>
> 1. do the repairs with his consent and pay the bill

Try this, if no consent is forthcoming see below.

> 2. as 1, then sue the landlord through small claims. Do NOT withhold
> your rent as that gives the landlord grounds for eviction

No it does not. There are established ways of handling repairs if the
landlord will not. Basically get 3 quotes, pick the cheapest, tenant
pays for the work and withholds it from rent. This pops up on
landlordzone.co.uk forums from time to time. Furthermore to withhold
the few hundred pounds of rent is unlikely to create an event under
which a Section 8 notice will stand up in court - the grounds under S8
are mostly at the judges discretion. 2 months rent owing would be a
mandatory ground (ground 8). From a landlords point of view it is far
better (if there are rent arrears) to go down the Section 21 route as
the judge has no choice but to grant posession (providing the notice
is served correctly).

> 3. Get the Environmental Health or Housing (depends on how your council
> is organised) to get the house declared unfit for habitation

Last resort, surely? Although EH could be used to put pressure on the
landlord to bring the wiring up to spec and to provide adequate
cooking facilities.

As to the footnote about wiring being up to spec for licensable HMOs,
not sure about this - it just has to be safe and having a periodic
inspection report, IIRC. I would not think you would need a rewire
just because it was done to an earlier version of the building regs.

Lobster

unread,
Jun 29, 2007, 2:10:54 PM6/29/07
to
ST wrote:
> On May 28, 1:20 pm, Owain <owain47...@stirlingcity.coo.uk> wrote:
> <snip>
>> You can't live in a house without a cooker, so if the landlord won't
>> agree you can:
>>
>> 1. do the repairs with his consent and pay the bill
>
> Try this, if no consent is forthcoming see below.
>
>> 2. as 1, then sue the landlord through small claims. Do NOT withhold
>> your rent as that gives the landlord grounds for eviction
>
> No it does not. There are established ways of handling repairs if the
> landlord will not. Basically get 3 quotes, pick the cheapest, tenant
> pays for the work and withholds it from rent. This pops up on
> landlordzone.co.uk forums from time to time. Furthermore to withhold
> the few hundred pounds of rent is unlikely to create an event under
> which a Section 8 notice will stand up in court - the grounds under S8
> are mostly at the judges discretion.

In addition to that, at a Section 8 hearing the courts will recognise
the landlord's failure to carry out repairs as a legitimate cause
(probably the only legitimate cause) to withhold rent anyway.

David

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward