gas supply to combi

Sponsored Links
bripl/namsag which particular reg do you refer to? I did not advise the user to do any repair - it would need to be tested of course. My post was perhaps rather too short, common sense on the part of the reader was assumed.
 
Sponsored Links
Oh very smart chris go into original post and edit it by saying add metal sheeting etc and will only be acceptable if it passes engineers test etc . Well this is still wrong it does not matter if the engineer carries out a Heath Robertson repair and how good it is only manufacturers approved parts should be used in the repair of a boiler and nothing else. It does not matter if he goes back and inspects it. Try phoning corgi . And after that any customer who you have left with a wrongly repaired boiler to advise them no matter how competent you are by having a wee bit of paper you have made a mistake. just adding this bit what is point of editing a message 17 days after as customer may already be dead.
 
ChrisR said:
" if and when CORGI lose there monopoly "

Don't think they will, any more than NICEIC, RCS etc. Also HSE matters aren't subject to EEC overrule so far.

And it's "their"!

2007 apparently there is an eec ruling about no company holding a monopoly coming in :LOL:
 
shaggy said:
DP, what if a Corgi registered guy makes a mistake and somebody dies, is he still competent?

Yes, perfectly competent, but now prosecuted as he was negligent. :)
 
That's wrong - the qualified bloke who makes an honest mistake wouldn't be penalised as harshly as the guy who knew he wasn't competent. There's plenty of legal precedent for that.

-------------

I admitted the bit about the rust hole was too short, prhaps leaving it open for some idiot to think a blob of goo would be good enough. So I changed it, very obviously.
The edit to wasn't intended to mislead - don't be stupid the date of the edit always shows.
If you have a point to make do try to engage brain first otherwise you look silly.

You got your facts wrong again. The requirement is that the appliance is safe to use. It doesn't become unsafe because somebody didn't use the manufacturer supplied wall fixings, does it. Or if a non OE fuse was fitted, etc. It would be reasonable to say it was NCS but no worse if it ain't leaking and nothing else is wrong about it like wrong materials. The regs provide for the engineer's use of procedures which are not in the MI. I have asked Corgi many times about such things and they usually come up with their own(?) phrase "you have to take an engineerial decision". I know what they mean though I never saw the word anywhere else. Corgi by the way have no power to interpret the regs in any particular way. All they can do is tell you is what they are.

Obviously the engineer carries the can for all such decisions, which IS in the regs.
A mechanical repair such as described especially if managed, is far less dodgy than say resoldering a pcb, which nobody can test.
 
quite right chris

but dont the regs say a lot about inapproriate fittings?
 
You still don`t get it do you chris it does not matter how less dodgy a repair is using your means it is still not allowed suggest you give corgi a call. I have a couple of good mates who are corgi inspectors and put this question to them over a year ago due to amount of changeovers i was getting because BG cutting boilers of for things like you describe and even simpler things like case seals gone on feulsaver 15s both said absolutey not allowed. So suggest you put brain in gear and phone them. Many appliances are safe to use altough fitted and repaired wrong ,the regs allow for conditions that may arise in the future which would make these appliances no longer safe. Example being a hob fitted on a flex this can be perfectly safe for years untill the rubber perishes with the heat from the adjecent oven and becomes an explosive situation.
 
Ollski replied:
shaggy wrote:
DP, what if a Corgi registered guy makes a mistake and somebody dies, is he still competent?


Yes, perfectly competent, but now prosecuted as he was negligent.
So the job had been done competently even though the woman died? I don't think so.
 
I must say something in chris' defence, he is probably one of the most knowledgable people on this site (kevplumb aside ;)) but he can be a bit dismissive of the rules we have to obey.


I stringly agree with namsag, if I came across the repair that chris suggested I would write out a RIDDOR report on it as it would be utterly inappropriate.

Sometimes I feel he must have his tongue fimrly in his cheek when he says these things, either that or he thinks **** em they will never find out who I am so *******s let them **** it up :evil:
 
Nope, you're all wrong.

"If an individual/company deviated from a British Standard, or for that matter any 'Normative' document when conducting work, it would be up to them to prove that their deviation does not compromise safety and that the deviation is as good or if not better than the standard prescribes. "

Which is what I said in other words above. I wouldn't have the slightest difficulty defending the actions I outlined.

Does anyone disagree with the quoted statement ? Better tell the HSE.

Remember that even BS's (etc) aren't law, they are intended to be taken as "deemed to satisfy" the requirements. You can be within and not satisfy (though have a good defence) or without and nonetheless satisfy.

I wonder if any of you have serviced an Ariston SX20. Once you'd split the seal on the combustion chamber, what did you do about it - throw it away? Ariston have no procedure for resealing it.
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top