There's also aesthetic considerations. In a recent kitchen rewire, I installed a single socket by the door for use by a hoover. This was vertically aligned below two vertically stacked single accessories - light switches and a dimmer. A double socket would have offended the house owner's (and my) aesthetic sensibilities.

LOL. yes. I think they used to tax on windows a while back. 1 Big window got only 1 tax but three little ones then three times as much tax. Probaly true on water taps too. Some years back my pal rented a factory. Himself and four workers. He wanted to install another cold water tap at tother end of factory for brews and handwash, It would cost him £millions extra in water rates (OK not millions but a lot of money). Same employees same water usage but double taps would have cost him dearly. I think partition walls too - split a room in two and more rates but leave a six inch gap at top and bottom and no extra to pay!

Water rates were often based on the number of water using facilities, cold taps, WCs and others. The reasoning being that a great deal of water was wasted via defective fittings, so two water taps serving exactly the same demand could well use more water than a single tap.

Hot water taps were exempted on the grounds that the fuel cost would deter waste. I recall a once popular fiddle to get round this. Install a "hot" water tap via a gas water heater. Don't turn on the gas, so that IN EFFECT you have a cold tap, but without any extra water rates liability. I once found a gas water heater with no gas supply.

Nice one. LOL. I like the ingenious ways folk get around silly rules/charges sometimes, The picture in a box is one of my favourites, likewise sun and planet gearing

Sparkingchip:

A few years ago I did a job in Stourport on Severn and tucked behind the meter board was the original meter readings card, the mains electric supply was installed just in time for Coronation of VI and Elizabeth in 1937.

I don't even know where the supply originally entered the house. It certainly wasn't as now, which is into a plastic box on the wall, thence to a switch fuse, and then SWA under the floor.

This reminds me of a case around 1970, when I was an electrical maintenance supervisor. Some offices were being renovated. I suggested that the users could make good use of the existing 15 A BS546 socket in each office replaced by a twin 13 A BS1363 socket. The electricians objected, quoting IEE regulations, saying that the new twin socket should be protected by a 20 A fuse, not 15 A. I argued that though this would not exactly conform with regulations it was neither unsafe nor impracticable. It was unlikely that the twin socket would have a load greater than 15 A applied, and even if it did, the fuse would blow to protect it. The electricians argued that to conform with regulations it should be possible for the twin socket to carry a load of up to 20 A. 


I was very fortunate in that my electricians were conscientious chaps who took a pride in all their work. I decided that the only sensible course to take would be to bow to their opinion. At extra cost, a new fuse board was installed to provide 20 A fusing.


And yet . . .


. . . it is now possible to buy triple 13 A sockets, with boxes to match, surface or flush. But these incorporate a 13 A fuse, limiting the continuous current drawn across all three to 13 A. A triple is permitted to supply less current than a double. Odd is it not? Any comments?

Not really - the standard rates single, double and triple sockets as 13A for the accessory, not per outlet. If you look at the rear of a 13A double, you will find it says it is rated at 13A. The triple sockets have been given a fuse, as with three sockets they are more likely to be overloaded. 


Regards,


Alan.