Connection Cost.

[le-cerveau]

As part of the preparation for our re-build next year I have been making enquiries about the electricity supply.  The current house is supplied by overhead lines (single phase) and there is a power line running down the side of the current house; see Topographic Survey.pdf (from my blog).

I made enquiries about, disconnection and establishment of a temporary site supply, followed by re-connection to a 3-phase supply.

I am looking at 3-phase because I may install an ASHP, the PV total capacity will be 9kW or more (up to 20kW split ENE, SSE, WSW so easier to split over phases.  Also the kitchen if at full load would require 24.9kVA (2 x induction hobs and 4 ovens).  My mother is in a wheelchair so the kitchen will be split level with duplication!

Ordinarily the house will draw very little power but I would rather be prepared for the worst.

I got the quote from the DNO of £15K + vat.  The biggest chunk 10K being the replacement of overhead lines with insulated conductors rather than the current open wire ones.  After a few questions it would appear that this is separate from the 3-phase issue and has to be done anyway as we are building within 3m of the current open wire overhead lines.

Has anybody else come across a similar situation?

[ProDave]

I have come across the rules re distance to overhead lines.

I think it varies from DNO to DNO, but up here (SSE) you start getting restrictions if you are within 9 metres of overhead lines (which we are) but when you look at it in more detail building within 6 metres of an overhead line is okay but between 6 and 9 metres you have to be aware of the risks re scaffold and diggers etc.

At 3 metres I am sure they will have to do something either move them, underground them or insulate them.

A 3 phase supply shouldn't usually cost much more than single phase, that's if 3 phase is available. Where I am we are on a single phase branch and it's aboput a mile to the 3 phase network so if we wanted 3 phase the cost would be astronomical.

[Gone West]

I had three uninsulated power cables that oversailed my plot for which I had a wayleave agreement. I told EDF, who it was at the time, that I wanted the the cables moved because I was building a house in the garden. They negotiated with the farmer, put two new new poles up and replaced the old cables with an ABC cable. It didn't cost me anything. At my previous house I had a similar problem where old oversailing cables crossed where I wanted to install an LPG tank and EDF replaced the uninsulated cables with an insulated ABC cable, again it was free of cost to me.

[Rattyjohn]

We've had to pay SSE the best part of £7K to get a pole moved 10 metres as the existing one was very close to our build, even though the previous building on the same footprint was erected with the pole already there. Part of this figure includes a transformer upgrade which SSE are contributing towards. We are also having to pay for a new stay on the next pole down as SSE claim the difference in the angle of the wires between old and new poles will mean repositioning the stay. In actual fact, the difference in angle is all of 3 degrees and the pole is leaning anyway, so they have forced me to pay for what is in effect remedial work to their transmission network. As the DNO's  are the only organisations that can carry out most of the work they basically have you by the short and curlies. My advice is to get a detailed breakdown of any work the DNO quotes for and challenge anything that seems way over the top (which will be most of it!). For example when I queried the cost of a digger and driver they told me that £700 per day was their standard charge.....needless to say I provided my own! They also charged me for separate deliveries of the pole and transformer.....lo and behold they arrived on the same SSE lorry. Once the final connection has been made I will be contesting certain elements of the quote again (complete with photographic evidence) but I fear it will be akin to getting blood out of a stone.

[Ferdinand]

1 hour ago, Rattyjohn said:

We've had to pay SSE the best part of £7K to get a pole moved 10 metres as the existing one was very close to our build, even though the previous building on the same footprint was erected with the pole already there. Part of this figure includes a transformer upgrade which SSE are contributing towards. We are also having to pay for a new stay on the next pole down as SSE claim the difference in the angle of the wires between old and new poles will mean repositioning the stay. In actual fact, the difference in angle is all of 3 degrees and the pole is leaning anyway, so they have forced me to pay for what is in effect remedial work to their transmission network. As the DNO's  are the only organisations that can carry out most of the work they basically have you by the short and curlies. My advice is to get a detailed breakdown of any work the DNO quotes for and challenge anything that seems way over the top (which will be most of it!). For example when I queried the cost of a digger and driver they told me that £700 per day was their standard charge.....needless to say I provided my own! They also charged me for separate deliveries of the pole and transformer.....lo and behold they arrived on the same SSE lorry. Once the final connection has been made I will be contesting certain elements of the quote again (complete with photographic evidence) but I fear it will be akin to getting blood out of a stone.

Did you read your Wayleave agreement? What type was it and what did it say?

I posted a longish piece about some of the aspects of moving wires here, though it applies to supplies to third parties, not your own connection.

Ferdinand

Edited May 27, 2016 by Ferdinand

[Rattyjohn]

Unfortunately the poles are not on our land, but on a fortunately very understanding and compliant neighbour's!

[Ferdinand]

13 hours ago, Rattyjohn said:

Unfortunately the poles are not on our land, but on a fortunately very understanding and compliant neighbour's!

In that case the same questions apply to your neighbour :-).

Depending on the type of Wayleave, they may just be able to instruct the company to remove them (we did).

Which may or may not be to your advantage, depending on alternatives for a new connection.

Ferdinand

Edited May 28, 2016 by Ferdinand

[le-cerveau]

We have a wayleave for the pole at the end of our garden so if they are replacing the wires down the side of the house I might be able to negotiate with them.  Not sure on what sort of wayleave but my mum (lives there at the moment) gets a discount on her bill.  I will need to investigate next time I am there.

[le-cerveau]

Success, I challenged the quote stating that the lines down the side of the house were subject to a Wayleave and that I didn't really want them so I sent in a e-mail, politely requesting their removal:

I need more details on the exact breakdown as you are talking about replacing lines as we are re-building our house too close to the lines. The lines in question that run down (and slightly over) the side of our property to a pole in our garden are subject to a Wayleave that I own. They do not supply our house but other properties (so are not my problem). If it is these wires and beyond that need replacing then that would be at your cost. I personally do not want the lines running down the garden and could (if so inclined) require them removed (removal of wayleave permission) but I am not at that stage at this point.

I would be agreeable to you replacing the lines with new insulated ones which could be tied in with our re-build schedule quite easily, we get the building down you replace the lines before we start the re-build, or you could, if you so wished, re-route them down a more suitable direction. The house they feed, with one exception, are all on a different street and the others houses(later build) on that street are fed from a different direction.

I have 2 copies of the wayleave (1960 and 1974) Document no 64/7184 and 64/11062 they are from the North Western Electricity Board Electricity Act of 1947, but are still in force as we receive the wayleave payment each year.

The result ENWL will now pay for the diversion work and my quote has gone from 15K + VAT to 5K +VAT.  Still not insignificant but a lot better.

 

[DeeJunFan]

Great Result.  

[Jeremy Harris]

That is a good result, but does make you wonder how much profiteering goes on by the utilities giving exorbitant quotes that are just accepted, without question.  I bet there are a fair few who just pay up, believing that there's no point in arguing with a monopoly. 

I'm really glad you've shown that there is a great deal of merit in arguing with them over price!  If Wessex Water had been open to negotiate the price to replace the 80 year old pipe outside our house, so we could have a feed from it, then they would have gained a customer.  Because they didn't, they have both lost a customer forever and will have to pay the whole cost of replacing that pipe before long, the whole price that they wanted to charge me.  I'd have accepted paying 50%, as the pipe feeds another of their customers, but they weren't having it.  They've also lost out on income, as I have run a garden tap to my neighbour's vegetable patch from our borehole supply, so they don't have to pay for the water they use on it any more, via their meter.

[Ferdinand]

Nice one.

As ever:

Detail. Detail. Detail. Detail. Detail.

F

[Ferdinand]

On 28/06/2016 at 13:44, JSHarris said:

That is a good result, but does make you wonder how much profiteering goes on by the utilities giving exorbitant quotes that are just accepted, without question.  I bet there are a fair few who just pay up, believing that there's no point in arguing with a monopoly. 

I'm really glad you've shown that there is a great deal of merit in arguing with them over price!  If Wessex Water had been open to negotiate the price to replace the 80 year old pipe outside our house, so we could have a feed from it, then they would have gained a customer.  Because they didn't, they have both lost a customer forever and will have to pay the whole cost of replacing that pipe before long, the whole price that they wanted to charge me.  I'd have accepted paying 50%, as the pipe feeds another of their customers, but they weren't having it.  They've also lost out on income, as I have run a garden tap to my neighbour's vegetable patch from our borehole supply, so they don't have to pay for the water they use on it any more, via their meter.

Perhaps a fair description would be "allowing people passively to mug themselves" !

[Jeremy Harris]

20 minutes ago, Ferdinand said:

Perhaps a fair description would be "allowing people passively to mug themselves" !

Very much so.  I also wonder at the adverse impact this sort of behaviour has on their business, though. 

Many people now know our story of having a borehole simply because Wessex water were exceedingly stubborn, and refused to entertain any sort of deal that would have saved them infrastructure cost in the short to medium term and gained them a new customer.  I'm sure that will have negatively coloured the view of them by many who have heard the story, and not just amongst the self-build community, either.  I've given three public talks, and each one has included the story of Wessex Water, so there will be dozens of people locally who will have heard it and formed a view about the company.