Good Plumber or Bad Plumber?

[Robert Fenster]

In my basement the pressure release valve, right where the water comes in the house, gave way. Started spraying water all over the place.

I immediately shut off the water with the cut off directly below the pressure valve. That stopped the spray, but water was still running at about a gallon every 10 minutes. I opened a tap in the basement and one outside. But water was still running. Called plumber. He said that PRV was gone, and it looked as if my shut off was gone/leaking too.

He instructed me to turn off water at the street, and he would be here tomorrow to replace PRV and add a secondary shut off.

The next day, plumber shows up replaces PRV and adds new shutoff above the PRV.

He then tells me there was nothing wrong with my original shutoff.

I asked him, why then did he add a new shutoff, if mine was already working, and why did he add it above the PRV? What possible use could that server.

He told me that with the two shutoffs, I could isolate my PRV.

Is that something I would ever need to do? Did plumber do me a favor by making my situation better, or did he sell me a $150 useless shutoff just to make a buck?

Thanks

Bob

[m Ransley]

His price was fair and his logic is for your benefit, im thinking. Also he probably could have charged more and not put it in. If all is ok I think you did good. I had a plumber replace all pipes at the incomming main , I had 2 leaks , Well when he finished I had 3 leaks and paid someone else again to redo it. Im no plumber but if you have no leaks you can now isolate it if you have it happen again so it sounds fair.

[Doug Kanter]

In my experience with two good plumbers, both have taken the "overkill" approach, which suits me just fine. Both leaks were in the cellar. In an unfinished basement, few things are nastier than trying to clean up water mixed with spider webs and other basement crap. I'll do anything to avoid it.

[DanG]

It sounds like an unnecessary valve to me.

It would be possible to have a valve on the incoming supply going to a tee, each leg of the tee going to a valve - one to the PRV, one to the house supply. The PRV would need another valve on the house side that would tee back into the house supply line. This arrangement would allow you to either send the water through the PRV, straight to the house (this would allow you to change out the PRV next time), or both which would not be good.

It is probably not worth the hassle or service call, but I would think you would still want to know whether you can shut off the water with the bottom valve. Turn it off and go watch the triangle in your water meter, if it is moving, the valve did not work and does not work. As long as you can shut off the water at the street, you are serviceable. Let's hope its not needed when the meter is covered with ice and snow.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Keep the whole world singing. . . . DanG

running at

said that PRV

be here

shutoff.

already working,

that server.

favor by

shutoff just to

[Toller]

I am confused.

You had a leaking pressure reduction (relief?) valve. You tried to turn off the main shut off (which presumably was before the PRV?), but it did not shut off completely. You had the water shut off at the street.

A plumber came out. He replaced the PRV and added a new shutoff after (above?) the PRV. He also reported the original shutoff was okay.

Is that what happened, or do I have it wrong?

I can't see much use for a shutoff after the PRV, unless there is something unusual about your plumbing. Why did he want to be able to isolate the PRV? (I suppose it might be easier to replace the PRV the next time because the water wouldn't be running back from the house, but he could have asked you if you wanted it done that way rather than just doing it; it is not routine.)

I also can't see how he could say there was nothing wrong with your main shutoff if you were unable to get it to work. Do you mean he fixed it rather than replacing it, or was it just fine the way it was?

I installed a PRV last year. My main shutoff didn't work completely, so I added a second shutoff BEFORE the new PRV so I wouldn't have to use the original shutoff again. (soldering the new shutoff on was a challenge, but that's a whole other issue) In my case adding a new shutoff after the PRV would have been a waste of money because I could use faucets in the basement to drain the system.

[Robert Fenster]

You understand it exactly as it happened.

Apparently, what appeared as the shut off not working was still some water in the pipes. Had I let the downstaris sink run longer, the "seeming leak in the shut-off " would have alleviated itslef.

I do not understand how a shutoff north of the PRV is useful all. If by turing off the main water, and running the basement sink, i could "virtually" drain the system without a shutoff isolating the PRV.

Thanks for the feed back.

[Toller]

You are correct, you do not need the shutoff after the valve any more than I did. If you didn't have the basement sink a case could be made for it.

[John Hines]

It allows a plumber to maintain and/or replace the PRV in the future without having to drain the rest of the water system. He can control the water as it drains, rather than letting it run out on the floor, if he needs to drain the system,

I can also see it providing you with a secondary shut off, in that you should be able to shut off the water at either, or both valves.

As others have said, not a requirement, but a nice, neater way of doing it.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

Completely unnecessary. Until the old valve fails. I've seen it happen and I have one that does not shut off properly. I'm going to install a double vale soon, but I have to shut off at the street to do it.

Had problems at my in-laws house and could not shut off the main. Sure wish a second valve was there.

The plumber has probably seen many examples and that is why he did what he did. Ed [e-mail]

[Toller]

Putting in a second valve is probably prudent, especially if the original valve was a "builder's special". However it should go before the PRV, not after it.

[Lester]

But then again, you can sue the plumber and get filthy rich.

And all the plumbers and their electrical and hvac buddies will rush to your house at your every call just dying for the opportunity because they love you so much.

Les

[xrongor]

i wouldnt say the valve is useless, but if that valve cost 150$ over and above the cost of the job without it, THAT sounds like a screw job.....

randy

[Mike Fritz]

Bob,

It seems many people here feel that it's good to have a valve on each side of the PRV. In fact, I think it's a great idea also. Now the problem I have with the situation is the fact the plummer installed the valve without your permission. He should have first sold you on the idea of a second valve first, before installing it then charging you.

--Mike

[NoOne N Particular]

I would wonder at what point he knew that your original valve was ok. If he didn't find out until the job was finished and he was looking at the original valve, that's one thing. If he knew very early on that your valve was ok, and then didn't give you the option having him continue or not, that's bad plumber. But I hafta say that it seems like an experienced competent plumber most likely would have known. On the surface, it sounds like rip to me.

Wayne

[xrongor]

ya the more i think about it this whole job smells of a ripoff artist.

randy