Gas boiler flue too near window

[gmcurrie]

Hi

Previous Landlord's Gas Safety Certificates over the last 7 years on a flat I let out have passed fine, but latest one failed due to the boiler flue termination being too near the openable kitchen window (about 270mm when regs. state it should be >300mm).

Flat is ex-council on 3rd floor in a block built in 1977 - I bought it in 2007 - Googling seems to suggest that the 300mm rule was introduced in 2008(- true?) - strange that previous checks have passed A-OK - just the luck of the draw, or have things tightened up recently?

Anyway, currently the flue takes a 90 degree turn out of the (Vaillant Turbomax), trough the brickwork wall, then terminates.

What I'm thinking is to put another 90 deg. elbow on the outside & then a short vertical extension to get it up & out of the way.

(as the flat is on 3rd floor it would be a real pain to have any work that couldn't just be done from leaning out of the kitchen window).

Is this a reasonable plan? Any possible pitfalls?

( - Photoshop of what I have in mind):

Untitled

• gmcurrie
• 19 Oct 2014
• 1

 

[Agile]

It is up to the engineer doing the CP12 what he sees.

Many are very lax and don't notice much at all.

Some just fill in the form and do virtually nothing!

Such a small discrepancy is not serious anyway. It would be classed as NCS as long as fumes did not enter the window when open.

The CP12 is only a snapshot and not a Pass/Fail like an MOT cert.

The less you pay the less they are likely to do. Unfortunately that suites most landlords who are not interested in the safety of their tenants.

Tony

 

[Agile]

But what is the black thing in the centre of the photo?

Tony


PS

The 300 mm is part of each manufacturer's requirements but is pretty standard for any fanned flue!

 

[gmcurrie]

- thx for reply -

umm yeah- I wondered as well - some kind of water overflow?..

 

[petit_pablo]

Most people don't even bother to note down minor issues like this on a CP12, not to standard isn't a safety issue just a record that something doesn't conform to the required standard.

It certainly isn't a Cp12 "fail".

 

[Agile]

It cannot ever be a "fail" because its not a pass/fail only a snapshot.

The only thing that can happen is for the engineer to refuse to issue a CP12 if he thinks its too bad.

Or he can issue the CP12 and a Warning Notice at the same time. In that case, with your permission he will turn off the dangerous appliance.

Tony

 

[FiremanT]

It cannot ever be a "fail" because its not a pass/fail only a snapshot.

The only thing that can happen is for the engineer to refuse to issue a CP12 if he thinks its too bad.

Or he can issue the CP12 and a Warning Notice at the same time. In that case, with your permission he will turn off the dangerous appliance.

Tony

Oh dear, Tony. Why would anyone refuse to issue a CP12? You are there to test,inspect and report. And get paid. The extent of defects is irrelevant,

 

[FiremanT]

It cannot ever be a "fail" because its not a pass/fail only a snapshot.

The only thing that can happen is for the engineer to refuse to issue a CP12 if he thinks its too bad.

Or he can issue the CP12 and a Warning Notice at the same time. In that case, with your permission he will turn off the dangerous appliance.

Tony

Oh dear, Tony. Why would anyone refuse to issue a CP12? You are there to test,inspect and report. And get paid. The extent of defects is irrelevant,

 

[Agile]

There are a very few where I would be hesitant to give a CP12 on something I considered dangerous.

Some landlords would think nothing of uncapping a dangerous appliance!

 

[Steelmasons]

Some landlords would think nothing of uncapping a dangerous appliance!

As long as you left with a paperwork trail then so what?