Many old homes are rewired and replumbed (is there such a word) when people feel that they have worn out.

In apartment buildings this type of work tends to take place when:

1.) The building is too costly to maintain
2.) The building is renovated anyway
3.) The authorities take action

Here is my question:

Should the installations in buildings be redone every 50 years? For apartment buildings, this is fairly easy legally. For single family homes it is a bit more difficult: You can't reasonably demand that people rewire their home. Instead the requirement should be linked to sale of the house. If the installations are more than 50 years when the house is sold, they have to be redone.

What is your opinion?

1920s/30s wiring is more than a little risky considering that the rubber sheathing disintegrates and crumbles over time. A modern PVC insulated system shouldn't really need rewiring on a regular basis though although it should be checked regularly and kept up to date with modern codes where possible.

It wouldn't be a bad idea to have them inspected at least once a decade ! (to be reasonable, most are left uninspected for multiple decades)

Remove/repair any dodgy DIY jobs

It would also be worthwhile removing the old distribution boards (Consumer units for those in the UK) and replacing them with modern equivlants with better protection, particularly RCDs.

Checking that all the outlets/sockets were functional etc should surfice

The only thing that would be different here is that grounding has been required on EVERY outlet since 1927 so there simply arn't any ungrounded outlets that need bringing up to code. (Schuko, BS546-(5/15amp) and BS1363 [started to appear in the 50s]) We also don't have any very low rated sockets, like 10amp types found around Europe

In a European system it would be perhaps advisable to look at modernising grounding arrangements and bringing the socket outlets up to modern DIN (16amp)/ NF (16amp)/ DEMKO (13amp)/ Swiss(?? amp) / Italian standards (?? Amp)


[This message has been edited by djk (edited 07-28-2003).]

C-H,

For something somewhat related see the K & T post in the Canadian forum area about companies refusing to insure houses with older wiring.

Bill

C-H,
That's a DARN good question!!.
Most of the houses and flats I've seen over the years, the wiring is only replaced when it causes a safety or fire hazard.
I'm not willing to sound like I'm lining my own pockets, but is 50 years too long between rewires?.
I think it really depends upon the Insulation integrity of the wiring that's already there.
On the other side of the coin, if it was known that a house had to be rewired in XX years, a few Electricians, may put a wee bit more thought into how they run the wires, the first time around!.

How about this:

An evaluation on each single family home greater than 30 years, every 10 years, and
upon sale of home.

Less on multi family dwellings (20/5),
even less on commercial/industrial/institutional (15/3).
If the evaluator finds something amiss, an
inspector is called in and depending on what is wrong, the customer is either asked to take care of the problem, or the fuse is pulled.

I think this is something which would be very difficult to apply in practice.

Very old wiring, dating from the 1930s/1940s is now almost certainly in need of replacement. The rubber insulation and sheaths will have deteriorated to the point that the cables are probably becoming quite dangerous.

PVC cabling installed from the 1950s onward, however, should still be perfectly serviceable so long as it hasn't been damaged in any way.

I see many older homes in this area which from the cables and devices have obviously had a complete rewire in the 1950s/1960s, and then other various extensions and modifications in more recent times. In many cases, the older 1950s wiring is fine, but the modern extensions have been badly carried out and are in far greater need of putting right.

I'd like to see the old rewireable fuses replaced with cartridge fuses or circuit breakers, but at least that doesn't require extensive rewiring.

Take a look here as well:
https://www.electrical-contractor.net/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002043.html

[This message has been edited by pauluk (edited 07-29-2003).]

Point taken.

I'll put it like this instead: "Be upgraded to the current building regulations every 50 years"

You mean make it a legal requirement to upgrade when the installation is 50 years old?

One practical problem would be how to establish the actual date of the original installation. I can look at typical wiring around here and say "That was installed somewhere between about the mid-1950s and the mid-1960s," but it would be almost impossible to pin it down to the exact year in many cases.

The idea of the government coming along and telling me that I must upgrade something in my home under penalty of law doesn't sit at all well with me anyway.

It wouldn't sit well with the constitutional right to possess property without being interfered with in anyway way. (Irish Constitution)

They can set minimum standards for electrical work in building regs etc in new builds but they can't do very much about old houses. These laws are based around a kinda "we'll only give you planning permission to build X within these guidelines" rather than an imposition of new laws on old buildings.

Electricians are legally bound to carry out installations to code... if they don't they're subject to being fully liable for any dammage if there is a problem. However, homeowners can do whatever they like! (although it might invalidate their insurance in some rare instances). That includes keeping 1930s wiring !

I guess we share a common Anglo-Irish outlook on this point.

As an enthusiast of old cars, I would not take kindly to suddenly being told that I must add air-bags, ABS brakes, seat belts, etc. to a vintage car to bring it up to modern standards.

By the same token, I do not believe the government has any right to tell me to that I must upgrade anything in my home either.

I see many electrical systems which are in a dubious, or downright dangerous condition, and obviously I will do whatever I can to convince the owner of the need to make the installation safe. But it is his property, and ultimately the decision rests with him.

In the U.K., there is nothing to force the owner of an older property to bring it up to modern standards in any respect. About the only official sanction I'm aware of is that the local council could condemn a building if it deteriorates to such an extent that it becomes a health hazard to the general public. (That's privately lived-in homes; commercial and rental properties are a different matter.)

djk, Paul,
I agree that no authority has the right to tell you what to do on your own property,(within reason of course) it just smells of Big Brother and the Government telling people how they SHOULD live thier lives.

Paul:

They can condemn a building if it's in the interest of the "greater good". It's pretty much a public safety privision.

They usually use it as a last resort to bring a derelict/semi-derelict building up to a reasonable standard where it is likely to fall down on top of a passer-by, is open to squatters who are posing a fire risk (bonfires in old warehouses have happened!)

They'll generally try to push the buildings owner to sell it on or do it up first.

It's a pretty rare occurance thesedays given the city centre property prices, most old buildings are highly saught after so it's not really in anyones interest to let them fall apart.

However, during 1950s and 60s it was pretty common as people were all moving to the suburbs and the city centres were becoming quite run down.

However, you can pretty much do whatever you like, short of installing your own nuclear powerplant, in your own home!

I don't see any need to legislate on rewiring in the UK, most Brits are well aware of the need to rewire their homes after a certain time, generally accepted as 30+ years. Whether they choose to do so is another matter.
There are already many ways in which householders can be "encouraged" to rewire / upgrade.
1) Mortgage lenders can retain part of the loan until rewiring and/or other remedial work is carried out when a property is sold. This is becoming very common in this area.
2) Some local authorities provide home improvement grants for sub-standard properties. These usually involve more building work than just rewiring, but I do know of instances where grants have been paid for rewiring only. A letter from an approved contractor (NICEIC/SELECT) stating the electrical installation is dangerous is required before the application is considered.
These grants are discretionary and cover 50 - 75% of what the authority term "approved expenses", i.e. regulation minimum number of sockets and basic services. This can be a big help to cash strapped older home owners.
3) Local electricity distributors (PoCo) have the power (no pun intended) to disconnect a consumer's installation they consider dangerous, or a danger to other consumers in the network, if the consumer refuses to make the installation safe.
I don't know how often this done but the Electricity Safety Quality & Continuity Regs. 2002 give the distributors the right to do so if required.
4) Insurance companies can refuse to cover older homes that have not been rewired, or increase the premium. I don't know if any UK home insurers' do this but some commercial buildings require inspection certificates for insurance cover.

Public sector housing (local authority / housing association) in this area is regularly rewired every 20-30 years, with periodic inspection & testing in the intervening years or on the change of tenant.

I find that I am now rewiring properties wired with PVC insulated imperial (1960's) & metric (early 70s) cables at the request of customers. In most cases the cables are in fairly good condition, but installations are not satisfactory for modern needs. There are too few sockets, usually wired on 1 ring main, inadequate earthing & bonding, and of course rewirable fuses with no RCD.

So, who is responsible if faulty, old wiring starts a fire, burns the house down and kills someone? Would the owner be willing to take the punishment for murder? If not, then the matter must be left to the government to decide. Safety must come first.

Another thing to consider, if the owner is using the property to rent out, then the owner must be obligated to maintain certain safety standards set forth by the authorities. If not, then the property owner should not be entitled to rent out the property.

[This message has been edited by JohnS (edited 08-02-2003).]

I'll echo David's comments here, as the same applies to England. The local councils have grant schemes available which cover part, or in some cases, the whole cost of certain works to privately owned homes. These are most often associated with either (a) essential works such as major structural repairs, leaking roofs, etc., or (b) fitting of double-glazing, insulation, and central heating systems to improve energy efficiency.

There isn't a lot of really old (e.g. 1930s/40s) wiring left in homes around here, and if I do find any it's usually on the original lighting circuit(s).

In many cases the house has had new lights, switches, consumer unit with RCD and MCBS, etc. but the lighting feeds have been joined onto all the old wiring. Somebody has moved into a house and doesn't realize it's there.

Just about everybody I've had dealings with in this situation has accepted without question that the old cable needs to be replaced.

Well, the owner of house would be responsible if it were shown that he was negligent in continuing to use wiring which he knew to be unsafe. But the question of negligence which results in an accident applies in practically all walks of life.

I'm fully in favor of having people bring their electrical installations up to a safe standard, but I believe it is best done by education rather than regulation.

Similarly, there are life span issues for other aspects of a house.

Old cast iron radiators.
Old attic water storage tanks
Roof felt
Guttering
Gas pipework (particularly anything that pre-dates natural gas)
Taps, washers, etc

If you don't keep these things up-to-date and maintained your house will collapse, flood, explode, turn green etc.

Same goes for wiring. It's just common sense to keep it in order.

Djk,
yes and I would include these in the repair.

You can't do anything about a single family home, unless it is rented out. I agree with Paul there. Any requirements would have to apply to the point of time when the house changes owner. (Darn, I just can't write a sensible sentence. )

But for rented homes and multifamily homes, it's not just your home you are putting at risk. I don't see anything strange about forcing everybody to rewire. When it comes to plumbing, ventilation and gas the cost of fixing the building at once is far less than fixing it flat by flat.

The best way is to go is the insurance company. It is enough that the authorities are concerned with cases where the neglect is such that it is an immediate danger. (Like today)

I'm sure that if some people saw the sort of stuff that finds its way into these, they'd refuse to touch another drop of water until the whole house was re-plumbed!