3DSonics wrote:

Fact: You are not an accredited approval body and thus in no position to state as fact something when constructed is safe and fit for intended purpose by the general public.

Fact: To do so is irresponsible on your part especially under an article aimed at ââ'¬Å"beginnersââ'¬Â.

Fact: The Health & Safety Executive has described your article as ââ'¬Å"unsafe practiceââ'¬Â.

Fact:  Disclaimers written in red do not absolve you of legal culpability.

Fact:  This has nothing to do with opposing views.

The responsible course of action is to either (a) remove the article or (b) manufacture the design yourself with appropriate safety approvals by the British Standards Institute.

And yes I make the same criticisms of all DIY mains cable designs published on the inter-web. This is nothing personal Thorsten just that these criticisms can be communicated.

Less so manufactured mains cable designs that similarly have no safety approvals because at least the end-user is assured, to some degree, of a competently constructed and tested product.

What you fail to understand Thorsten is that because a component - in this case an electrical cable - is approved to a certain specification (the approval you refer to is voltage) does not mean it is automatically approved as fit for an intended purpose where that specification is applicable. Neither are you in a position to give such approval.

It is for this precise reason that distinction is made between approvals that relate to specification and approvals that relate to intended purpose. Hence BS6500:2000 is described as ââ'¬Å"Electric cables. Flexible cords rated up to 300/500 V, for use with appliances and equipment intended for domestic, office and similar environmentsââ'¬Â.

To make speculative assumption (for that is exactly what it is) and then to promote this to those who may be inclined to believe it has authority is, without doubt, irresponsible.