Servicing your own gas boiler

Oct 20, 2013 230 Replies

Some observations from having maintained various boilers around the family for years...

I would say that any open flued boiler should be serviced every 12 months because the risks from poor combustion and fume leakage are significant and easily lethal. (We don't have any of these for some years now.)

This would be followed by boilers which are room sealed but not fanned flues and still rely on flue gas convection for correct burning.

IME, fanned flue boilers do a much better job of staying clean and burning well (whether condensing or older). If you have a flue gas analyser, you can easily check their combustion without opening them up.

Potterton Profile (light use) and Potterton Suprima (heavy use) showed no deterioration in CO/CO2 ratio, although I decided to open and service after 7 years. In both cases, nothing actually needed doing except vacuuming out a layer of dried flies/spiders which wasn't impacting the operation, although I did blow any dust out of jets/burners too. Heat exchangers have remained clean.

Keston condensing - initially did this annually, but Keston told me that tends to do more harm than good. Top burner gasket lasts about

4 years, so it now gets done that often, plus an annual flue gas check. Also flushing debris out of the bottom of the combustion chamber once or twice a year, after experience showed it could block the condensate drain otherwise (this can be done without opening it up). Regularly check for condensate leaks, which are well-known for writing off these boilers if not caught quickly.

Main multipoint water heater - needs dust blowing out of jets and mixing tubes every few years. Older ones need descaling - newer one with teflon coated heat exchanger tubes has never needed descaling.

On Monday 21 October 2013 10:41 Fredxx wrote in uk.d-i-y:

How does that differ from what John said?

Was the certificate requirement a part of the insurance contract?

Mine is silent on the subject.

'Competence' might have been mentioned, but it isn't defined.

Certificate holders might well be as competent or otherwise as the DIYer, but all will have some explaining to do at any inquest. A certificate regarded as bestowing competence isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Insurers

"I can't it went up in the blast"

You have to be able to prove competence ........ being certified by approved organisation is the 'accepted' way, the fact that you don't like it would not hold up in Law.

When I sold my house ..... I was asked to provide the certificate

Who is going to rate your competence? .... yourself.

So how do you prove competence without it.

I installed my own heating system, and once complete I had an inspection and a Gas Safety Certificate issued (in fact Building Regs Inspector asked to see it)

I now have it under annual maintenance by a gas Safe roistered maintenance company (SWALEC)

If I follow the logic above anyone can deem themselves competent, and go round doing Gas work as long as they don't get paid. Wasn't this why CORGI was started initially.

The whole point of official competency schemes is to avoid harebrained approaches like this.

I presume there was enough forensic proof of poor installation that the guy didn't have a leg to stand on. I know the insurance refused point blank to pay out which is why the blackened shell remained so long.

Have you money to burn - or did you use the cheapest possible crap when self installing?

But that would imply that people that don;t ask know everything.....

Since there is no standard for 'competence' - it not having been defined legally - one cannot 'prove' one meets it.

On Monday 21 October 2013 11:52 Terry Fields wrote in uk.d-i-y:

I have just taken out new buildings+contents insurance. AXA make *all* the policy docs available as PDFs, so I just searched them, including my Schedule.

"Gas" is mentioned twice:

1)...turn off the gas, electricity and water... (in an emergency, to reduce the damage)

2) My insurance covers gas tanks apparantly, if any...

A search for "cert" mentions the contents cover covers important certificates. No other mention.

So without actually reading it verbatim, I can confidently say it does not require any certification on anything as a condition.

=======

Interestingly - it has no mention of locks (window or door) except:

1) they will pay to replace locks if I lose my keys

2) theft from unlocked hotel rooms not covered

3) unlocked bikes not covered.

Strangely they do not say I have to lock my house - not do I need locks of any given standard.

One of the other insurers CompareTheMarket offered required 5 lever locks, window locks and that all locks would be locked when we were out. Well, that's never going to happen in our house so I was looking for that particular condition specifically...

On Monday 21 October 2013 12:40 Rick Hughes wrote in uk.d-i-y:

That is not specified - so moot.

There is a general presumption in contracts of insurance that you will take reasonable care to do work properly. Insurers are not keen to pay out when the insured has been negligent.

When I was selling my house, I was asked if gas and electricity works were certificated. I ticked the No box, and that was that. House sold.

There's no point in having a paddy at me about it, I just told him what the law says, and for which you've kindly posted the relevant statutes.

Was I wrong?

The law only requires one to be competent. So, the question is, is he competent if he has never done the job before?

It is akin to doing a car repair equipped with a Haynes book; you only know if it was within your abilities if you complete it without cocking it up.

If there is a subsequent gas leak or explosion that can be traced to defective workmanship, then he wasn't competent.

That brings us back to the 'competence' problem of not being defined. Just because a building blows up it doesn't provably mean that anything about the installation process was incompetent or negligent. Boilers, etc, carry warranties for this reason.

After I had my previous system installed, a leak developed in the joint on the supply side of the meter, which the installers hadn't touched. Buildings blow up for reasons other than lack of competence.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required