Need Help Explaining Saftey Issue To Customer

[LeRoyCorbid]

Hello All, I am having a weird problem with a customer, and am looking to you for some support.

Heres the deal. Wired a new house for this person many years ago and have done some small projects with him since, real nice guy. He own a quonset hut that he has been renting out, and we have spoken about the need to redo the wiring there. Well last week he asked me to come and take a look at it and write up a bid to do the work.

I was expecting to find a bunch of knob and tube wiring and was very pleased to find that all of the wiring was installed in conduit. I was not pleased to find that the electrician had pulled only two conductors and that one of them was uninsulated. I was amazed, in all my years this is one I have never seen. Lucky for me it was obvious that the wires would be easy to replace since they were moving in the pipe nicely. Told him I would send a bid.


Worked it all up and he said he was ready to go then called me two days later and told me that he was told by an "Electrician" friend that the wiring was fine and that there was no reason to replace any of it.

His friend told him that this was a common way to wire in the old days and that the conduit would provide the ground. Obviously my customer didn't tell him that the neutral was uninsulated, and he is now convinced that I am some sort of hack out to screw him.

I am feeling pretty bad because the customer is blameless in all of this, and I feel that this is some of the most dangerous work that I have ever seen. I have found lighting fixtures where the power wires were tied to the ground/neutral conductor and the lamps neutral was carrying the breaker and I could arc weld with his antique sub-panel (40 amps). The 14-gauge solid aluminum wires running the swamp cooler and heater has melted the insulation in places. I can't just walk away.

SO this is my last hope would any of you chime in and help me explain the seriousness of this situation?

Thank you all!! I think I needed to vent a little...too.

 

[Electrogrunt]

Ask this customer if he might be willing to meet with you, and his electrical "friend", and the NEC. Then maybe you can use the NEC to your advantage. Use the code to point out the violations in the installation, and then ask his so called friend to refute these violations. I very much understand your frustration, as I have had to turn down work for people who wished to sidestep local requirements for electrical work, as well as doing the work to the minimum code standards. Once you have explained to this customer exactly what dangers exist, you should no longer feel any responsibility for what happens, as you have done what you could to help him. The unfortunate thing is that someone may lose their life due to his decision.

 

[K8MHZ]

How about calling an inspector? Offer to pay for the inspection if you are wrong.

 

[charlie b]

Try this as a "thought experiment": Let's pretend the conduit is not present, and that the circuit is being run in open air. You have an insulated hot wire carrying current to the light (or whatever the load is), and an uninsulated neutral wire carrying current back to the panel. Ask you customer if he would be willing to grab the bare wire. I am guessing that he would consider that to be dangerous, almost suicidal.

Next, explain that for the existing installation, the bare neutral wire will be touching the metal conduit, and is therefore in parallel with the conduit. As a result, the conduit will be carrying current all the time. Anyone touching the conduit will be doing the very same thing that a person touching the bare wire in the "thought experiment" above would be doing. If your customer considers the first scenario to be dangerous, then he has to agree that the second scenario is just as dangerous.

Finally, you can mention that the fact that nobody has yet gotten hurt does not mean that a person cannot be hurt. Also, the fact that it had been an acceptable practice in the past (if that is a fact, I don't know if this really is how things were done in the past), coupled with the fact that it is not an acceptable practice today, tells me that we learned our lesson somehow, and that is why we chose to change the way we do things.

 

[Sahib]

In addition, the customer may also be told no GFCI breaker or receptacle can be used, even when he requires one.

 

[GoldDigger]

In addition, the customer may also be told no GFCI breaker or receptacle can be used, even when he requires one.

No GFCI breaker for sure, but I do not see what (other than code) would prevent a GFCI receptacle from being used.

 

[petersonra]

No GFCI breaker for sure, but I do not see what (other than code) would prevent a GFCI receptacle from being used.

Code would not prevent a GFCI receptacle from being used.

I can't say I have ever heard of anyone running bare wire as a neutral inside of conduit.

 

[charlie b]

If the conduit with the bare neutral is downstream of a GFCI device, breaker or receptacle, the GFCI device will trip instantly every time the circuit is energized.

 

[GoldDigger]

If the conduit with the bare neutral is downstream of a GFCI device, breaker or receptacle, the GFCI device will trip instantly every time the circuit is energized.

So all that really means is that you cannot use feed-through protection but must instead put one GFCI receptacle per outlet location. Does not keep you from using one, just forces you to buy more.

 

[K8MHZ]

So all that really means is that you cannot use feed-through protection but must instead put one GFCI receptacle per outlet location. Does not keep you from using one, just forces you to buy more.

If the conduit is grounded and electrically connected to the yoke of the receptacle, and the neutral is bare and also touching the conduit, my thought is that it would trip every time used, regardless of the feed-through or not.

 

[GoldDigger]

If the conduit is grounded and electrically connected to the yoke of the receptacle, and the neutral is bare and also touching the conduit, my thought is that it would trip every time used, regardless of the feed-through or not.

Not unless the appliance is sending current through the ground wire, in which case it should trip.

Only the current flowing through the line and neutral terminals of the GFCI receptacle are being checked for equality.
That said, some GFCI receptacles may also include a test to see whether there is ground to neutral continuity with low resistance, but I think that would be only on the load side of the outlet too. Have to take another look at a schematic to confirm that.

 

[LeRoyCorbid]

Genius Approch, Thanks!!

Genius Approch, Thanks!!

Try this as a "thought experiment": Let's pretend the conduit is not present, and that the circuit is being run in open air. You have an insulated hot wire carrying current to the light (or whatever the load is), and an uninsulated neutral wire carrying current back to the panel. Ask you customer if he would be willing to grab the bare wire. I am guessing that he would consider that to be dangerous, almost suicidal.

Next, explain that for the existing installation, the bare neutral wire will be touching the metal conduit, and is therefore in parallel with the conduit. As a result, the conduit will be carrying current all the time. Anyone touching the conduit will be doing the very same thing that a person touching the bare wire in the "thought experiment" above would be doing. If your customer considers the first scenario to be dangerous, then he has to agree that the second scenario is just as dangerous.

Finally, you can mention that the fact that nobody has yet gotten hurt does not mean that a person cannot be hurt. Also, the fact that it had been an acceptable practice in the past (if that is a fact, I don't know if this really is how things were done in the past), coupled with the fact that it is not an acceptable practice today, tells me that we learned our lesson somehow, and that is why we chose to change the way we do things.

What a great way to look at this, unfortunately even though he stated that he would not touch the bare wire, he was unable to make the connection.


My assumption is the offending electricians quote of "That it was the old school way" was in reference to the practice of pulling two insulated conductors, and using the metallic conduit to provide a path to ground. This was common in my area and I have seen it many times, and to be honest if that was the case I would not have recommended rewiring the entire structure, and would have left it alone as long as a good path to ground was confirmed. :roll: (please don't hate me lol)

Thanks for the great suggestion!!

 

[LeRoyCorbid]

My humble opinion

My humble opinion

Not unless the appliance is sending current through the ground wire, in which case it should trip.

Only the current flowing through the line and neutral terminals of the GFCI receptacle are being checked for equality.
That said, some GFCI receptacles may also include a test to see whether there is ground to neutral continuity with low resistance, but I think that would be only on the load side of the outlet too. Have to take another look at a schematic to confirm that.

I think that I would have to agree with our HAM friend. My customer did request GFCI outlets in his kitchen, and I told him that if I was to attach them the same way his existing recepts were wired they would trip every time there was a device attached to them, and if I didn't terminate the ground screw it would be a 15.00$ receptacle.