If there is an isolating transformer, COC apply?

[AndyD]

Did you reach a final design spec for this installation? I'm interested to here the outcome.

[Justloadit]

Hi Andy,
The project got canned, once I mentioned the problems that could arise in the future. They simply said that they could not take a chance with our proposal, and what if they were forced to do the COC, it could just break them to conform.

[AndyD]

Sorry to hear that

[Sparks]

I see its all over now but you might want to consider just running your cable along the perimeter and installing 220V LEDs. Quicker easier and I am sure can be worked out cheaper. I agree all the way with what Andy said. I would have said 220V LEDs from the start.

[Dave A]

Could we revisit this particular issue for a moment.

Being a very very old school, the complete electrical system would then have to be evaluated and possibly upgraded to get the COC. All that we would be contracted to do is the lighting the sports field. If we have to contract out the COC process, the upgrade of the current system would force the school to abandon the project due to the financial implication, and we will lose a very lucrative order.

So I am looking for acceptable safe ways to do the lighting circuit.

The harsh reality is despite the requirements of the regulations that Justloadit quite rightly points to, additions to installations are happening
a. without a COC being issued on the additions, and
b. without there being a COC in place on the existing installation.

My question to all and sundry is what would you prefer to see going forward -

1. An amendment to the regulations that accommodates this situation (and stops penalising the honest contractor when it comes to competing for these jobs), or
2. Raise the general awareness of the industry and the public to try to bring industry practices into line with the regulations as they currently stand?

[AndyD]

I'd say firstly I'd like to see more customer awareness of the requirement that a CoC is issued for any addition and alteration to an electrical installation as and when it's done and it's their responsibility to make sure one is issued. Until the day customers start demanding CoC's for the new work they've had done then the door will be wide open to cowboys and unregulated/non-compliant installation work.

I'd also like to see the DOL being more vigorous in their policing of contractors who a blatantly doing dangerous installation work or issuing invalid or forged compliance certificates. It would only take a few criminal prosecutions with hefty fines or custodial sentences to curb the flagrant fraud that's happening at the moment and it's a pretty target rich environment for them to make some examples.

Finally, up until recently, most if not all of the regulations aren't retrospective until further changes or alterations are made to that circuit or in the case of the DB a new circuit is added. Forcing the new regulations and standards on the customers entire installation regardless of how small the alteration or addition being made is counterintuitive, it's preventing registered contractors from being competitive because they'll always find an alternative unlicensed guy to do the work and turn a blind eye to the rest.

The only way this would work is if they go the whole hog and say all installations must be brought up to the latest standard within the next 6 or 12 months otherwise they face disconnection. I'm not saying they ought to do this but it would be interesting seeing them getting that kite to fly