Isolator to CU tails and moving

ericmark · Post by **ericmark** » Fri Apr 08, 2022 3:20 pm

Part M building regulations approved document states

Consumer units are mounted so that the switches are 1350-1450mm above floor level.

most door ways are around 2 meters so looks as if that consumer unit needs moving down the wall.

See page 9.

Super_paulie · Post by **Super_paulie** » Sat Apr 09, 2022 6:55 am

That's interesting. Thought it was just new builds it had to be that height...

wine~o · Post by **wine~o** » Sat Apr 09, 2022 8:55 am

Super_paulie, new builds is correct, also I believe when there is a house refurb including a re-wire.

Neelix · Post by **Neelix** » Sat Apr 09, 2022 9:29 am

ericmark wrote: ↑Fri Apr 08, 2022 3:20 pm Part M building regulations approved document states
Consumer units are mounted so that the switches are 1350-1450mm above floor level.
most door ways are around 2 meters so looks as if that consumer unit needs moving down the wall.

See page 9.

Part M ONLY applies to new builds and complete rewires - so in this case its not relevant.

If the building inspectors are involved then check with them as they seem to apply the regs in unusual and inconsistent ways

ericmark · Post by **ericmark** » Sat Apr 09, 2022 10:45 am

In general you can continue to use some thing which today does not comply, but can't make some thing worse.

It would need permission of the LABC inspector to mount outside the heights given in part M. He may permit it, but it is his call, he can also make you do things not required, I had a bathroom with an opening window which the regulations say you don't need a fan, but the LABC inspector insisted one was fitted.

One can hardly complain a tradesman has not done some thing which would brake the rules.

Neelix · Post by **Neelix** » Sat Apr 09, 2022 11:13 am

ericmark wrote: ↑Sat Apr 09, 2022 10:45 amI had a bathroom with an opening window which the regulations say you don't need a fan, but the LABC inspector insisted one was fitted.

One can hardly complain a tradesman has not done some thing which would brake the rules.

Part F has required fans on extensions, new builds and refurbs for some time now in bathrooms, cloak rooms, utility rooms AND external vents for cooker hoods

Problem is people don’t keep up with these regs …

ericmark · Post by **ericmark** » Sat Apr 09, 2022 3:01 pm

Neelix wrote: ↑Sat Apr 09, 2022 11:13 am
ericmark wrote: ↑Sat Apr 09, 2022 10:45 amI had a bathroom with an opening window which the regulations say you don't need a fan, but the LABC inspector insisted one was fitted.

One can hardly complain a tradesman has not done some thing which would brake the rules.
Part F has required fans on extensions, new builds and refurbs for some time now in bathrooms, cloak rooms, utility rooms AND external vents for cooker hoods

Problem is people don’t keep up with these regs …

I was referring to some thing which happened in around 2005, it was not what I wanted to do, my sister had said "You never finish a job, we are getting a pro in" and I was happy with that. However the so called pro, ran off into the Welsh hills around Corwen never to be seen again, leaving me with a part completed job of fitting a wet room.

I though all was being done above board and correct, so assumed the LABC had been informed, seems I was wrong, the builder was doing it without getting planning permission.

You can't untell the LABC, so now I have a LABC inspector breathing down my neck. Dotting i's and crossing t's. First thing they pointed out it is the owner who is responsible for telling them. When the owner is a 80 year plus couple this to me was unreasonable. Neither my sister or I had power of attorney, but we got the lecture.

Our main quest was to be able to complete at as lowest cost we could manage. Getting the LABC inspector to accept our signatures on the installation certificate was going to save us around £100, he wanted to get an EICR done, by some one he selected, and my son said, and I will admit I was cringing a little, if the guy you select fails it, what will you do? My dad has a degree in electrical engineering so the guy you select will have to be at least equal qualified.

Lucky it worked, it could have back fired, and the LABC inspector agreed to accept my signature on the installation certificate.

He missed the lintel being only supported on one side, but insisted on an extractor fan as he said we would not open the window as anyone calling would likely walk past the window.

In the grand scheme of things that was nothing.

However I did point out that one has to where one can conform with building regulations, I am sure if there is good reason one could get the LABC inspector to bend the rules and allow the CU to be located higher or lower than the regulations say, but there would need to be a good reason, not simply I want it there.

I was permitted to mount sockets lower than the 450 mm, when I pointed out the bed could damage the sockets at that height, wanted the sockets within height of bed legs so the bed did not hit them. But at the end of the day a good reason has to be found.

Not to point this out will likely mean the LABC inspector will demand the CU is moved, but pre-warned likely some good reason can be found. But this would also have been told to the DNO as they would naturally assume the CU would be at the height building regulations require.

As it stands we have no idea why the CU should be mounted higher than normally permitted, so seems likely the DNO was not told either.