Not so much a reply, as a question, as I don't know where else to post this ... A guy came round to service my boiler(Greater London): couldn't get the front off, so left: charge: £70. My partner took it off & I got another company in to look at it, with the cover taken off to facilitate their visit. Their charge for a service: £70. They did an analysis of the boiler and (after repeated requests, have let me have a copy). Verbal report: fan is weak; corrosion on heat exchanger, readings high : flue temp 170. Efficiency 88, pointed to 'soot' inside the boiler. Said that, given the condition of the boiler, they couldn't carry out a normal service, but suggested sending someone to quote for a new boiler (who came the following day). I am now looking to get another guy in to assess the boiler - recommended by a neighbour with a boiler of same age (15 years), who she says has maintained & repaired her boiler in spite of its age. He will charge £75 and says he will do repairs if at all possible (obviously for a charge). Am I being unreasonable in thinking that £70-75 for a service is fair, but if no service is carried out, then there could be a reduction ??? Finally, how should I clarify the situation for the third person (who will also quote for a new boiler), so that I specify that I don't simply want a duplication of the information/analysis I've already been given (which I have transmitted to him). I am happy to pay what is fair, but is it reasonable to ask him to look at the machine & tell me if he can replace parts etc. (obviously at a charge), but not a full £70 charge if he can do nothing. He has already said he will deduct the £75 from the cost of a new boiler if that is the way we go.... Surely if a service is £70 and a guy comes and cannot complete a full service is it fair to charge the full amount ? Genuine question, as I am perplexed and fearful of throwing good money after bad... Tx for your efforts at reading thru this !!