Newly installed combi boiler causing pipe leaks

[alittlerespect]

Dear bengasman

I am a professional and I take immense joy in eating people who make spurious comments for breakfast, even if it leaves a foul taste behind with any remnants being spat out!!

Regards

 

[Nige F]

Consumer Direct - Watchdog - Matt Allbright and Beautiful M8 WTF IS WRONG with the Bloody Joke Country . All it needs is ALL plumbers/ gas fitters whatever, to be properly registered and Not allowed to do ANY work without being so registered. What would I have done if I hadn`t been a plumber - I`d have been a plumber in Australia or Canada

 

[bengasman]

Dear bengasman

I am a professional and I take immense joy in eating people...

That's fine, as long as you eat your boyfriend and not me.

 

[transam]

Way I see it pressure testing the existing pipe work in your house would have or might have caused it to leak any way , than what , would some do ??

Blame the installer for it ? . expect it repaired free of charge ?

 

[kirkgas]

Way I see it pressure testing the existing pipe work in your house would have or might have caused it to leak any way , than what , would some do ??

Blame the installer for it ? . expect it repaired free of charge ?

thats exactly what i thought, imagine doing a pressure test at the quote stage, water leaks then you say to customer "oops, now you will need to pay £100's to have the leak fixed firat"

when i did quotes for combis i ALWAYS discussed the potential for pressure loss due to old pipes, and it was written into T&C's that only work carried out by us was undwer warrenty, as i always advised a swap to pressurised system could only be guaranteed IF the whole system was replaced, which was price option 1, if they chose boiler only that was price option 2 and it was clearly written that pressure drop and subsequent damage was not covered, it always made some people say that i was expecting a leak, to which i repied it happens quite a lot, but i have fitted many many system which have no problem, cold water pipes should take 6bar, they are installed the same way as central heating pipes which under normal use will be about 2bar and under fault conditions 3bar, if you dont want to pay for all new pipes then you take responsibility for the condition of them i cant as i didnt fit them, the advice given about the boiler being not fit for purpose is mince,

 

[JohnD]

...Note that in this particular case the pipes failed immediately on commissioning, were initially repaired, but subsequently failed on several occasions....

I don't understand that. How did they "initially repair" them if buried in concrete? Did they later leak in the same place or somewhere else?

 

[TelBee]

JohnD,

they could see where the leak was coming from and then dug up the floor. They then saw the pipe was heavily corroded, and replaced the leaking section with a new length of pipe.

I fully appreciate that it is not reasonable for a business to be held responsible for installations they did not perform (not if they are to remain in business). I have been quite sympathetic towards the company concerned, and I will be honest in saying that they have made a lot of effort to repair the pipework, even though they did not install it.

But I am also a fully qualified professional engineer (in a different discipline) , and understand that the word 'professional ' has many connotations associated with it. These include adhering to strict policies and procedures, assessing risk and making customers aware of the risks and alternative solutions.

So, in this particular case, I would hope I would be treated in a similar fashion, in that:

a) I was made aware of the risks in installing a high pressure system in existing pipes buried in concrete,

b) advised of alternative, lower-risk options, and

c) adequate tests were performed to ensure that the system as a whole would function (that includes the existing pipes, which the new boiler must operate into).

The last point appears to me to be an obligatory responsibility of the installing company, since a new boiler that will not work (because the existing pipes can not handle the water pressure) is of no use to anyone.

This opinion also seems to be echoed by the Institute of Heating and Plumbing Engineers.

As a point of information, I did not go with the cheapest quote that I received, instead paying more to use a reputable company, who I believed would adhere to professional standards.

 

[transam]

Your point about adequate tests ?? how would you ecpect this to be done ?

One needs to apply logic , any test would involve pressure at or beyond the design pressure of the boiler /system ? that may well be ok with exposed pipe work but hardly practicable on buried in the screed pipe work ??so u test it it fails than what ??

reinstate your old boiler ?? but the pipe has failed under the floor ?

It might or could be argued that a system should notbe sealed up unless acess ,( visual ) can be gained to all pipe work ??

Any way digging up floors repairing old pipework now in my view is not sensible , repipe the ground floor ?? may be ?

 

[expertgasman]

The apparent statement from the institute is interesting. If one was to pressure test the system for 2 hours, on every installation, this would seriously affect the price. This would have to be done on a date prior to the install, otherwise you would have a van fulll of gear, if the client decided on a different, non combi boiler. If the old system was in working order, you'd probably have to reinstate.

After this point the installer should have made us aware of the existence of weak pipes and the need for a decision to a) replace pipes or b) use an alternative (lower pressure) boiler

A pressure test won't identify a "weak" pipe, only a leaking pipe, which may have been excacerbated by the test itself. So having identified a leaky pipe, it would be rather pointless to use an alternative boiler.

I don't disagree with the principle, but how many clients will be happy to pay an extra days labour for the test, plus additional costs whena fault is idnetified, plus the delay in getting the work started. An installer willhave to carefully draft a contract to ensure that a negative result doesn't result in a client trying to avoid payment. I don't now do many boilers, but when I did, I had the customer to sign to acept the risk, and only once did I have a rad leak, whilst I was present. The client was perfectly happy to pay for a new rad, although I was as generous as I could be with the bill.

I also always change rad valves when fitting a combi unless they look pretty new.

 

[TelBee]

Transam, Expertgasman,

as I said earlier, I am not a heating/plumbing engineer, so I do not know the exact details of how a pressure test is performed.

However, after we had the problems (as is always unfortunately the way) a friend of my wife told us how she had recently had a combi installed. The installer made a point of her being there when the pressure test was performed, and also making her aware of the consequences of pipes failing (water damage, unsuitability of a combi etc).

I would have been more than happy with that approach.

Our installer told us after the problems that they install hundreds of combis where these problems do not occur, so it seems to me they undertook the installation at risk (since there are clearly occasional cases when pipes can not take the pressure).

The question is who should pay for taking the risk. It seems to me that the installing company have at least partial responsibility.

 

[electronicsuk]

I think you have to appreciate that there is little that the installer could have done. As others have already pointed out, a pressure test would be no different to pressuring the system after having fitted the boiler. If it causes weak pipework to spring a leak, then this is now a permanent failure. Without repairing the pipework, the leak will still be there, regardless of the pressure the system is running at.

As a spectator, it appears to me that you are trying to place blame on the installer in the hope that your system will be repaired free of charge when, in all honesty, the portions of the system untouched by the installer are entirely your responsibility. I would suck it up and have the entire section of suspect pipe replaced - presumably it has been buried directly in the concrete and corroded in multiple locations throughout the run?

 

[heatingman]

about the risks before, though I was aware because I had heard......was in 2 minds whether to go with a combi for that reason.

You have clearly stated that you new the potential pitfalls of converting an old system to a combi but chose to go ahead.

The advice given by the institute and others is horse.

YOU wanted a combi and YOU knew the downside, stop trying to blame others who from whats been said have been very helpful and proffessional

 

[TelBee]

electronicsuk,

if you read through my posts you will see that had the test failed I could have had the option of using a lower pressure system; I was replacing an older open system that did not have a problem with leaking pipes.

As for me just trying to get some money from the installer for the cost of the system not working, then yes you are quite correct. But I am not a chancer, I will only pursue if I believe they were at fault in not performing required tests and procedures. The information I received from the institute indicates that they believe they were at fault.

The boiler installation cost me close to £3K, and they are now want a further £2.2K to get the underfloor pipes bypassed.

So I think I would have to be pretty dumb to pay them a significant sum on top of another without questioning whether they have any responsibility for making the system work.

As a professional engineer I realise that if I make similar mistakes in my practices I have to pay for it. I do not see why this should be any different for a professional heating company.

 

[electronicsuk]

electronicsuk,

if you read through my posts you will see that had the test failed I could have had the option of using a lower pressure system; I was replacing an older open system that did not have a problem with leaking pipes.

And if you read my post, you would have seen that once you start a leak, reducing the system pressure is not somehow going to magically seal the leak, which I'm sure, as an engineer yourself, you will understand. Ergo, if the pressure test revels a leak, it will need to be repaired regardless of what boiler you fit.

As for me just trying to get some money from the installer for the cost of the system not working, then yes you are quite correct. But I am not a chancer, I will only pursue if I believe they were at fault in not performing required tests and procedures. The information I received from the institute indicates that they believe they were at fault.

It's your call, but the vast majority of plumbers here seem to think that the installer is not to blame and, for what it's worth, I am not a plumber and also share the same opinion. Don't believe everything you are told by an organisation just because their name is preceded by the word 'institute'. As an electrician, I can tell you that some members of the IET also come out with a load of rubbish.

The boiler installation cost me close to £3K, and they are now want a further £2.2K to get the underfloor pipes bypassed.

The repair quote seems excessive, I would ask some other installers to quote. I'd be very surprised if you can't get the work carried out for half that cost.

 

[TelBee]

Heatingman,

I think anyone on this forum would be well advised to steer clear of you for any work, if you believe the opinions of your governing body are horse; the word 'cowboy' appears apt.

If you honestly believe you can supply a service at such costs without any risk on your part, if the customer is not fully made aware of the risks, and correct procedures are not followed, then I think you are in the wrong profession.