Newly installed combi boiler causing pipe leaks

[heatingman]

If the installer had carried out this pressure test you and the institute are stating should have been carried out, you would now have,

A heating system that leaks and is not useable with high, medium or low pressure applications. So who in your world is now responsible to carry out the repairs.

 

[expertgasman]

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.
.

But theres the problem, Tel. The test is destructive. As said, a pressure test cannot locate a "weak" pipe, only a leak. Ergo, if the test fails, you can't fit ANY boiler without rectification. You could argue that the TOTAL cost of a failed test plus rectification would have been a little less, but there would have been a greater initial charge for conducting the test in the manner which you now feel was appropiate.

I would have expected an engineer to appreciate the nature of the test

 

[bengasman]

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.

According to the institute, the "correct" test would have taken 2 hours, and let's add a modest one hour to come to your place, set it up, break it down and go on to the next job.

Can you honestly say you would have been happy to pay for 3 hours' labour at the time of the quote?

And if so, which of the various people that quoted would you expect to do the test? One and tell the others? All companies that quoted?

 

[silverback18]

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.

Can I correct you on your above post, the CIPHE are NOT a governing body of the Plumbing & Heating industry, so I believe you owe Heatingman an apology, you have tried to discredit him by suggesting he is a cowboy, because he disagrees with what the CIPHE told you, they are simply a trade association, that installaers can join if they so desire they have no say, or control over the industry, can you please explain what gave you the impression that they were a governing body of our industry

 

[TelBee]

The main point I was making was that the system I was replacing (because it was very old and developed faults not related to loss of pressure) was FUNCTIONAL with the existing pipes (it was an open system).

The company I used RECOMMENDED that I use a combi boiler, which immediately failed to operate on commissioning. I was NOT made aware of the risk of the combi not operating with pipes buried in concrete.

If they had performed a test which showed the pipes were not suitable (I know of at least one company who did perform such a test and highlighted the risk) then I could have used an open system boiler, which I repeat, was WORKING with the existing pipes.

As to which institute governs heating engineers, I don't really give a damn, since it is quite clear that certain engineers are operating without adherence to any strict procedures of any governing body.

The problem is that this profession (like a lot of others) appears to be operating mainly unregulated, unlike other countries such as Germany and the Netherlands. There is a cost for such a regulated system, but I am happy to pay for it if it results in a better quality service.

I will certainly not be making any apology for these observations.

Thanks to those who provided constructive comments, and given what I have heard, and the advice of the Institute and Consumer Direct, I will be pursuing costs.

The negative reaction towards the Institute and Consumer Direct of certain posters clearly shows where they are coming from, but they are there to enforce standards and protect the customer,which in this particular case, I am grateful for.

It might be worth engineers and customers also noting that there are procedure for installing combis, and apparently means of pursuing claims (contact Consumer Direct for details) when they are not followed.

I will not be posting on this thread again since I will be too busy sorting out the mess of the heating problem, so thanks again to those who posted.

 

[silverback18]

TelBee

Just to correct you again, the Institute are not here to enforce standards, nor are consumer direct

 

[expertgasman]

I will not be posting on this thread again since I will be too busy sorting out the mess of the heating problem, so thanks again to those who posted.[/quote]

You don't get the support that you crave, so scurry off. It will be interesting to look at some other forums to see where you pop up. Typical. You must be a very clever Engineer not to understand the nature and implications of a pressure test. It is clear that the outcome would be pretty much the same as it is now, except for slightly reduced perception of inconvenience, the pipework pressure tested, fails and the underfloor section has to be replaced in its entirity

There is a cost for such a regulated system, but I am happy to pay for it

I'm not sure that that is true, as it would be the same cost as of which you are now griping

 

[electronicsuk]

If they had performed a test which showed the pipes were not suitable (I know of at least one company who did perform such a test and highlighted the risk) then I could have used an open system boiler, which I repeat, was WORKING with the existing pipes.

So you knew there was a risk, and still went ahead with the installation using another company? If you do manage to take this to court then I hope that the defendant's lawyers don't come across this topic, as I doubt it would leave you with a leg to stand on.

 

[silverback18]

If they had performed a test which showed the pipes were not suitable (I know of at least one company who did perform such a test and highlighted the risk) then I could have used an open system boiler, which I repeat, was WORKING with the existing pipes.

So you say that one company did carry out the test and highlighted the risk, well the risk could only be that the test showed a drop, which meant that you had a leak, there is no way to test to see if the pipes may leak under greater pressure, they either leak, or they don't, the test pressure would of created the weak spot to leak if it was not leaking before, so consequently this company may of caused the problem, but I would assume that as you had a tank fed system before, you have always had a leak, but because the header tank used to top the system up, you never noticed, but now you have a pressurised system and the pressure drops you now notice, I would love to know who the installation company was and get their side of the story.

 

[joesoap1]

Hi,I don,t think he actually had a pressure test perfomed.

As a Engineer, mainly hydraulics, dealing with callosal pressures, we do similar tests and have to add a percentage increase to achieve a SWL, ( safe working load).

1. Would he have paid for the test if it showed a fault ,knowing a fault is always likely ?

.2.Would he then have expected the testers to rectify the fault free before recommending either system ?

3. To create a fault one HAS to exceed the reccomended running pressures during testing, thus illiminating a future fault using existng pipework.

 

[TelBee]

Broken my vow of silence, but have to clear this up:

I asked the installing company whether they performed a test prior to installation, THEY told me that they did as it was a standard procedure for installing a combi (I asked them AFTER they had performed the installation and we had problems. I am not a heating engineer and did not know that this had to be performed, but learnt afterwards that a test had been performed by another company at another installation).

After first running the boiler a leak was IMMEDIATELY detected by the engineer by the pressure dropping in the boiler, and water appearing at our kitchen floor. The engineer initially had the cheek to say that it was our washing machine leaking (which was clearly later to be proven false when he had to dig up the floor and find the source of the leaks, and incidentally this did not add a lot to his credibility).

I questioned the validity of the test because why did it not cause a similar, immediate leak when it was performed? Was it because a) it was not performed for the required duration, temperature or pressure, or b) never performed at all ?

As for comments about 'scurrying off', that is not in my nature mate, I will stand and fight this case like I would anything else. I just don't have enough time to waste with timewasters like you.

And as for me knowing that there was a risk with a combi, I am not an idiot and therefore know there has to be a risk with running a system at a higher pressure. I am also not a heating engineer and do not know ALL of the risks and procedures for installing a combi.

However I paid what I believed to be a professional company to do the job believing they would know, paying a fee for their expertise (otherwise I would do it).

I will also gladly quote this thread should it ever get as far as a court, because I have been completely open about the course of events.

 

[electronicsuk]

I asked the installing company whether they performed a test prior to installation, THEY told me that they did as it was a standard procedure for installing a combi (I asked them AFTER they had performed the installation and we had problems. I am not a heating engineer and did not know that this had to be performed, but learnt afterwards that a test had been performed by another company at another installation).

That's fair enough then, and in light of that I will happily retract my earlier comment. However, I do think that you should give some credence to opinions that the many gas installers/heating engineers on this forum have taken their time to share.

I have no doubt that you understand the nature of the pressure test, and that you would be in the same situation right now regardless of whether or not this test was carried out. Once you open up a leak by increasing the system pressure during the test, reducing it will NOT fix the leak, nor will using an vented system. You seem to have successfully managed to ignore the questions so far as to what you would expect the engineer carrying out the test to do in this scenario, presumably because it doesn't sit well with your argument.

I would strongly recommend that you get some other quotes for having the repairs to your pipework carried out, as I find it hard to believe that there is no alternative route that could be taken with new pipework to avoid you having to dig up the floor again. If you take this to court and lose, you will still have to pay for the repairs PLUS whatever legal costs you incur.

 

[xr4x4]

after reading through this post, the reactions from the professionals strike me as they are being attacked I.E defensive.

i understand the customers point of view but the recations from most professionals have been 'not my problem mate' which is bascily the response the OP has got from the installer of the boiler.

which is common reaction, esp after you have been paid for a job. thats why i try and not take payment untill the customer is full happy with the job, becasue after youve been paid, unfortunately it doesnt become one of your priorities to correct a problem.

now im sure people will try and tell me im wrong, but nobody likes problems and ive been in customer service and they are normally avoided as much as possible.

which im sure most people here can relate to, how often have you made a phone call with a compliant or problem and you where told/promise someone would call you back..... and they didnt?

my 2p.

 

[heatingman]

Thanks for your comments, much appreciated.

There is I expect a lot of mis-understanding flying around with regards this magic pressure test you are told should have been done to check the suitabillity of your system.
The "pressure test" the institute" and consumer direct are referring to is probaly a mains water pressure/flow check to establish the suitabillity of incoming mains to generate adequate hot water.

There is not any form of non-destructive pressure testing that can be done on exisiting pipework to establish if it will be suitable for a sealed system.

Other than looking at radiators, considering the age and general condition of system thats all that can be done.
You knew the risks, I expect were made aware and went ahead with conversion.

 

[electronicsuk]

after reading through this post, the reactions from the professionals strike me as they are being attacked I.E defensive.

i understand the customers point of view but the recations from most professionals have been 'not my problem mate' which is bascily the response the OP has got from the installer of the boiler.

which is common reaction, esp after you have been paid for a job. thats why i try and not take payment untill the customer is full happy with the job, becasue after youve been paid, unfortunately it doesnt become one of your priorities to correct a problem.

As far as small jobs such as changing a boiler are concerned, I personally wouldn't want to pay a tradesman for anything other than materials until the job is completed to a satisfactory standard. However, I can also see the tradesmans' point of view, in that some customers will try and withhold payment without good reason. It all comes down to whether or not the installer is at fault for causing the leak, and the majority view here (which I also share) is that he/she is not responsible.