OT: British Gas going over the top with boiler safety diagnosis?

Mathew Newton presented the following explanation :

The material the flue is made of is probably cement asbestos - the very lowest asbestos risk category. It poses no risk, despite the asbestos scares unless disturbed or is actually breaking up. Only the most basic of precautions need to be taken for its removal and safe disposal, despite companies who would like to persuade you otherwise.

Reply to
Harry Bloomfield
Loading thread data ...

recently had a minor issue with a congested flue on a 30 yr old Gloworm,. fairly obvious that carbon monoxide kills and they understood that I understood this important point. But they were not happy with just turning the supply off.,they cut and capped the gas feed pipe. You try getting a Corgi guy out to fix a condemned boiler. theey would toch it with a bargepole so it was back to good old BG for a very expensive repair. Moral of he tale, keep your boiler serviced by anyone (CORGI) other than BG and dont let BG in your property unless you want some hard sell Ed

Reply to
Ed D Ball

Most problems I've come across with gas appliances (since just before te arrival of north sea gas) have all had a common factor, the involvement of BG or its predecessor, the gas board.

None of the problems would have occurred if I'd DIY'd the job, the only reason I didnt do the first one was I felt BG were the experts and had insurance. They (repeatedly) tried to charge for the remedial work until we threatened to claim for the ill health caused by their poor workmanship. They then were never heard of again.

Reply to
<me9

On Tue, 9 May 2006 20:43:02 +0100 someone who may be Hugh Jampton wrote this:-

You are wrong, they have been cowboys for a long time:-)

Reply to
David Hansen

In message , Peter Lynch wrote

The single BG employee who is getting the commission on the sale and fitting of a new boiler does care about where his wad of cash is coming from.

Reply to
Alan

Hi,just caught this thread when its half done!. Having looked at the pictures I assume that there is no apparent defect in the boiler or its installation which constitutes an immediate danger? i.e did they indicate that the flue was defective,that the ventilation was defective or that products of combustion were being discharged into the living area i,e going anywhere else apart from up the flue? .If not then get an independant assessment and DONT go buying new boilers just yet,unless you really want one!

Having checked the pictures I would agree that the flue is not 100% perfect but then the world isnt perfect and the thing has been installed an operating perfectly well for some considerable time?. I would not have considered "turning off" this appliance. I would have had concerns if the flue actually penetrated the tiled roof as this would generate downdraught problems due to the short upstand of the flue pipe and the stepp angle of the roof. However as the flue terminal is at the gable end and substantially in the clear,i wouldnt expect any problems.

The "at risk" category means that the appliance is turned off i.e it is turned off at its operating controls and verbal/written advice given of the alleged defect. "at risk" appliances are not physically disconnected and therefore you should be able to turn it on again. I'm not suggesting you do this until you have had it re-assessed. What i am suggesting is that pending further info,i do not see much wrong with it and therefore you shouldnt go buying new boilers until you;ve had an independant assessment.

For info my qualifications for making this post are that i have worked in the gas industry for 25 years,i was trained by BG when they trained quality engineers and am currently qualified to the level of HND building services -gas engineering.

Remove antispam and add 670 after bra to email

Reply to
tarquinlinbin

Firstly, thank you all for your comments - your efforts have been much appreciated by both myself and the MiL. (BTW Owain, I found your Times article - many thanks - it came up in a Google search yet not the Times' own search engine... typical!)

Given the seemingly-unanimous assessment by the group that whilst it's impossible to state with certainty with the limited info I have provided it is certainly looking like BG are exaggerating somewhat on the assessment of the installation and are perhaps taking advantage of the unclear position in the circumstances. Hence, in acknowledgement of the fact that it would be unwise of me to attempt to ignore the potential for genuine safety concerns I have followed the suggestion(s) of penning a letter to BG asking them to clarify in writing, and in no uncertain terms, their assesment of the installation and necessary works required to put things right. An interactive telephone conversation would have its advantages however I want clarity in writing before deciding how to proceed.

The MIL had the visit from the 'estimator' today.... This'll probably be of little surprise to anyone but it came to =A34000... However, if she signs before the end of May they will throw in a free towel rail!

Unfortunately, and in the circumstances you couldn't really make this up, the batteries on the printer were dead so the MIL didn't get any written itemisation of what work is required! She did take some notes which, perhaps unsurprisingly, included the seemingly-obligatory powerflush, moving the (new) boiler to a wall where the fitter would have easier access to the flue (i.e. no ladder), frost stats, earth bonding (>=A3100?! unless there was some misunderstanding).

As the weather has taken a slight turn for the worse the MIL has turned the heating back on - as far as we are aware the system is in the same state is it was during the winter, if not the last time it was serviced, and in the absence of any clear detail as to what is unsafe (other than that mentioned i.e. flue position and asbestos) I don't think this is an irresponsible action to have taken? I do hope it is also 'legal'?

Again, thank you all for your input and, if it's of any interest I will advise of the outcome. Incidentally, a second-opinion as to the safety of the installation would obviously be of value here - is it possible to get this done by someone without a vested interest in the outcome? Corgi perhaps (someone hinted this might be an option)? I'm worried that if she gets another (non-BG) fitter out she may inadvertantly pick another one with pound signs in his eyes...

Mathew

Reply to
Mathew Newton

I'm with you on this one. The regs have tightened in the last few years. I haven't got a copy of BS

5440 to hand so I cant quote the chapter and verse but I'm sure the terminal needs more than 600mm (maybe a 1000mm) above the roof. The window is clearly far enough away and is not the issue.

See the FAQ. This has been categorized as AR this means they have no power to disconnect the appliance, they have requested that you stop using it.

Get someone to check it over who is not a jobsworth, make sure that this open flued appliance gets checked at least once a year.

The boiler and system are however towards the end of their life and an upgrade should be considered.

CORGI will very likely always back up the decision of any fitter so there's no point looking there for help on this one.

I suspect that BG fitters are told to always put an AR notice (or even ID) on all open flued boilers.

Reply to
Ed Sirett

Those clearance are for Fanned Balanced flue terminals of the type that is now very common. The clearances for an open flued appliance are given in BS 5440 and/or the instructions.

See another thread I'm posting later about a rant I'm starting to get BSI docs into the public domain. It will help sort this sort of nonsense.

Reply to
Ed Sirett

Ah... that puts a different perspective on things. The height of the terminal above the roof (should that be above the apex, or the roof slope?) had not occured to me... and in all fairness I wonder if that what's the BG guy said, implied or meant to the MIL?

Either way the clarification request should nail that one... can the terminal height be extended? (and if anyone can provide the '5440 detail that'd be most welcome)

A fair comment, and if her circumstances were different (FIL regretably passed away only recently) she might be in a better position to weigh up the pro's and con's, particularly with regards to how long how she might even be staying in the house. I just don't want to see her 'scared' into upgrading the installation and certainly not at top dollar prices.

Mathew

Reply to
Mathew Newton

On Wed, 10 May 2006 21:04:01 +0100, Ed Sirett wrote (in article ):

This raises an interesting question.

If A (for example financially motivated) BG fitter puts an ID or AR notice on an appliance, can another (more objective) fitter over-ride it, if in his opinion, the risk is not there?

Reply to
Andy Hall

600 above the ridge or 1500 horizontally from the roof surface. I thought the ADs were supposed to contain the gist of the regs for those poor mortals who can't stump up for each and every BS, but I see they've copped out with this one.

My Unsafe Situations is in the van and I cba to go out and get it right now but I'd guess the recommendation is that if the flue is drawing OK and everything else is ticketty-boo then it'd just be NCS.

I recall that wall-adjacent (or is it wall-facing) terminations are now immediately classed as AR whereas they used to be NCS, so maybe the BG bloke got confused (or sloppy).

Reply to
John Stumbles

Found I have a copy of the BS. Unusually there is a helpful diagram, fig

12, which indicates more onerous distances when within 1.5m of a dormer window. From the photo the dormer window may just be within the 1.5m, but pehaps the OP could clarify.

Jim A

Reply to
Jim Alexander

Found a copy of the BS and I don't think that is right. There are helpful diagrams to clarify clearance distances on pitched roofs. Varies with roof pitch but 600mm above roof penetration for pitch

Reply to
Jim Alexander

I'm looking at one such installation (on a neighbour's house) now out of the window, and the identical looking flue goes no where near up to the top of the roof, but stops near in line with the top of a first floor window, and about 1 metre to the side of it.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

No it doesn't cos IMHO don't think its true, see my other posts.

Re the boiler replacement, the end of the heating season is a good time. Your boiler may/may not have some residual life but is essentially written down. Check your immerser heater works, put the boiler back into service and request some non BG quotes for a replacement. Of course it will have to be a condensing boiler, a subject in itself. Avoid a distress replacement at all costs.

Jim A

Reply to
Jim Alexander

Could be - I agree it's hard to tell from a photo. I'll be up there in

10 days time so I'll have a measure (MIL could probably do without leaning out of the window with a tape measure! :-)) - in the mean time hopefully the request for unequivocal clarification from BG should settle the uncertainty.

Mathew

Reply to
Mathew Newton

Fraid this seems very common, the job is abused on a wide scale.

NT

Reply to
meow2222

If that picture shows the flue being too close to an open window then half your street will also have to have their boilers switched off. They can also come round and turn off my neighbour's boiler which BG installed 3 years back and is far nearer to her window and in fact nearer to my door than your Mother in Law's flue. Looks like BG just trying to make a quick buck.

Reply to
daddyfreddy

Depending on old MIL is and the size of the house and the insulation, the cost of a new boiler may never be recovered in her lifetime.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.