ProDave

The fact your "electrician" could not figure that out shows his lack of competence. So progress at last. Quite probably all you have to solve now is getting a proper feed to the bottom CU without that over crowded mess in the main switch, allocating the circuits properly and testing them properly as you go, and getting some form of RCD protection to the bottom board.

It is usually number of "bedrooms" that dictate the number of parking spaces needed. Large study in addition to the two bedrooms seems a way to avoid an extra parking space required. If you are not keen on an upstairs, but want lots of storage, consider making the loft as an open volume either with a ridge beam or at least attic trusses, and encompass it within the insulated area preferably with a warm roof construction. Then you will have a large storage space that also leaves the option to develop the upstairs into habitable rooms later of if you want to. Even think where you could incorporate a staircase to do that in the future, but leave it as a good quality loft ladder to start with. A couple of roof windows would make it more of a useful space.

Cartridge fuse holder? Not sure you can get more than 32A though? Type C or D MCB?

Yes trying to get away from that abomination. When the top CU main switch is put back where it should be there will just be one L and N feed in to the top of it from the SWA feed. The N link down to the bottom CU will connect to the very top right high integrity N busbar. The L link down to the bottom CU will be fed from the MCB right next to the main switch. The input to the bottom of that MCB will be jumpered to the main switch with the short 2 section busbar. the original L cable coming out of it, which was supplied with the CU and splits in two to feed the two RCD's will also go into the bottom left terminal of the main switch with that short busbar.

Not quite what you want. If you set up your top CU as that picture I copied from the linked website, you just need an additional 2 prong bit of busbar A bit of this You could buy a length and cut it down, but any electircian worth his salt will have odd bits of it lurking somwhere.

Resurrecting this old thread. I have encountered an issue. Above i describe the 433MHz remote control switch for my additional dump heater. Well it upsets the operation of my car key entry / imobiliser system. This has been a minor issue for a long time, but when the dump heater is on it just desensitised the receiver on the car, and I had worked out where on the car the receiver was so you just held the key fob close to that point. Well now I have a new car, and this afternoon when the dump heater was on, the car would not unlock and I could not find a sweet spot where the key fob would work. So I now have to find a solution to a problem I have been ignoring. Ultimately I might look for an alternative radio control transmitter / receiver pair, either one that does not leave the tx energised all the time, or one that does not use 433MHz. To find an immediate work around I am going to implement an extra switch input that will disable that extra radio control heater and do so for a timed period say 10 minutes to give me time to go and get in the car and drive away.

L jumper Live Jumper. This page explains it well https://www.consumerunitworld.co.uk/what-is-a-high-integrity-consumer-unit-and-how-to-populate-it-331-c.asp You already have the high integrity neutral configuration with the 3 neutral bars. you just need to space it out as shown on that page. The "High integrity" circuit (just one in this case) will be a single MCB right next to the main switch, so you need just a 2 prong busbar to link the L out of the main switch to this single MCB. That will be the one that feeds to the bottom CU. Then the 2 RCD's each have a multi prong busbar feeding their MCB's. The bottom CU could have an RCD after it's main switch (or even instead of) or a row or rcbo's. Picture from that linked site:

I would try and reconfigure it as a "high integrity" board so the one MCB feeding the bottom board does not have RCD protection, that would be provided in the bottom board. It's nearly there with the 3 neutral bars, you would need one extra L jumper to do that, I keep a collection of spare CU bits that would probably yield something.

This is one of the details I am going to have to work on when I start assembling it. It is going to be a "corner door" to the pantry, by that I mean the pantry is a small rectangular room and the bifold door will be at 45 degrees cutting off that corner of the rectangle. If it slides on some form of sliding gear, the open door will end up perpendicular to the track. I would like the open door to fold right back against the wall. I can't see that happening with the supplied track and gear. So was yours free swinging? i.e the far end not constrained by a track? How did you find it?

There will be some challenges that is for sure.

Don't have a cold loft. Continue the insulation and air tight layer up the roof to the apex and down again. So much easier to detail and you have a warm loft.

I will have to wait and see what running gear comes with it and either use it as is, or adapt it.

good point. In the case of all the other doors XL Joinery approved the use of Osmo door oil, so perhaps that's a "good" one as in does not attack the adhesive?

I just expected hinges at the hinge end. Back in the day, when they were in fashion, I made numerous sets of bifold doors with louvre doors (remember them) with just ordinary hinges at both the hinge end and between the doors, and the outer end of the folding one had a "pin" on it that ran in a guide. I will of course study it carefully before detailing the framing.

I would be interested to see a diagram explaining why such a big gap at the hinge end? I don't see why it should be any different to the hinge end of a normal door.

It is beginning to sound like he is a mate rather than a real sparky. Lets hope he actually knows how to connect up the other ends? I am sure the CU's you have can be reconfigured. If asked I would put all the big loads on the top CU and have the bottom one fed by one MCB in the top one as a submain and use that as an overflow for the small load circuits. That would avoid the dodgy 2 sets of tails in one terminal. I hope he has not actually charged you much for his efforts?

Well I will build the frame to match the door to save trimming, so if it is 2mm too small so what. I was hoping to read someone had used oil without problem. Most of our doors are XL Joinery who also say do not oil, but when questioned were happy for us to oil them with Osmo and indeed there have been no problems and a very nice finish.

Typo corrected, about 40cm / 18" so the pair of doors is about the width of one normal door.

So re phrase the question: Where can I buy a a pair of Oak very narrow doors, about 40cm wide each?

This seller on ebay has some https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/295684685686?hash=item44d82e3f76:g:ngAAAOSwQqBkV-dt&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA0ORp1VAxfkbNehWYtIdR3%2FzI33rzcS4upSsgZxjhF7tHEmgiquZcO0k5mLkBWHmVZ5SYKQEFXnnFIDgiZxJ5ZXvvnOOfb1LELxIUkMM7OQzSN1QIb%2BY8Y6JkMp52cO718DAgriI76hIsfVmICA%2F09JCZzSiArABtnyiMIQyhgtCQ6B%2FPbMm7LUB%2F2xqc4Td%2FMxPuDJbPcSVkIAHwAwLbEUrDJO6ma9VUfHPZ9sZGBmxetnG92jLkJ0uTlrvN8dNojAVdIUq5dWkzGe3QzzfKBtQ%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR9Cg6LqBYg Actually he only has one left. That is probably the best place to search.

Looking for this for the pantry. There is no room for a conventional width door to open or for a sliding door so we are going to use a bifold door set. The best (aka cheapest) I have found is from Wickes, irritatingly not in stock to view has to be ordered on line https://www.wickes.co.uk/Wickes-Geneva-Oak-Cottage-5-Panel-Internal-Bi-fold-Door---1981mm-x-762mm/p/132012 It's almost half the price of a seemingly identical thing from Howdens. Very mixed customer reviews from brilliant to rubbish. And it says not suitable to be oiled (we want to use Osmo door oil like all the rest of our Oak doors) Any opinions or other suggestions?

I am counting a total of 17 circuits connected (there may be some disconnected and there are more than 17 mcb's) The top split load board will take 16 mcb's so surely it would be possible to make some alterations so you only have 16 circuits? Or I would have preferred the top board set up with a main switch and 20 rcbo's it would have been a lot simpler, a lot better and I doubt much more expensive (funny enough this is almost exactly what I actually have)

Today's top tip. The average "1 ton builders bag" that you often get full of gravel, sand etc, nicely fits over the top of the average small cement mixer to keep the worst of the weather off it.

I am not convinced that the terminals will take two feeds like that, I would want to give them a good wiggle test to ensure they really are clamped properly and secure. I was questioning why no RCD on the bottom CU I think you have answered it that he has removed it, presumably because it was tripping as well? What really needs to happen is every circuit disconnected. Confirm the CUs really are configured correctly and work properly, rcd's tested etc. Then one at a time dead test then reconnect each circuit and then live test it. If that works, move on to the next etc. That is probably what a fresh electrician would do if someone else comes in to sort out the mess. And I agree with a comment above, before re connecting one circuit at a time, agree on a sensible split of circuits between the two rcd's,

I think you may be on to something there. How long it would take to sort out depends on the skill of the electrician and a bit of luck. See if moving that N cable fixes some of the issues? My concern is he has looped the feed into the top CU down to the bottom CU. In which case I await the explanation from the "electrician" as to why none of the circuits connected to the bottom CU require RCD protection.