Problems Over Paperwork

[Bill Wright]

I had a HETAS installer in to install my wood burning stove and various charges were made (parts. labour and HETAS Certificate) but the certificate and invoice have not been forthcoming after six weeks. I have asked the installer twice for the paperwork.

I phoned HETAS last week as the installer seemed no longer to be on the register of approved HETAS Installers and discovered that at the time that the stove was installed, the installer was on the register but as of the day I called they were not. Further, HETAS haven't received and paperwork either electronically or by snail mail requesting an installation certificate.

Subsequent to that call, I called the installer who said that they were having problems with insurance and that the situation would resolved but there has been no reply to a subsequent email requesting the invoice.

The questions that arise are:

If the installer was HETAS registered at the time of the installation but perhaps can't get re-registered where do I stand as regards certification? I asked HETAS and they said that they get in touch with the installer.

Would I have to pay out again for another registered installer to certify the installation?

In the event that a new installer found the installation unsafe do I have to pay them for re-installation? See photo attached.

 

[bernardgreen]

Common sense suggests that seal is not going to be gas tight ( it will leak fumes into the room ) so that installation is unsafe.

How did you "know" that he was HETAS registered, did you accept his word or do you have dated documents that show he was the time HETAS registered. ( or was claiming to be HETAS registered ).

If you can prove he was HETAS registered when he did the work then I feel HETAS should ensure the work is redone to make the installation safe and that HETAS should cover all the costs as one of their approved installers has put you and your home at risk.

If HETAS can prove he was not registered then you will have to take action against him to recover the costs of making it safe. That could be expensive and at the end he may declare himself bankrupt to evade paying you any money.

 

[Bill Wright]

Thanks Bernard

The Installer was on the HETAS register on their website at the time of the installation and had issued two certificates to neighbours this year. It was revealed when chasing up the certificate with HETAS that they were no longer registered though HETAS would not give a reason.

HETAS' complaints procedure is built on sand from my reading of it. Personally I wouldn't want the "Installer" to darken my door again. The subject of bankruptcy had crossed my mind and I expect that I'm going to have to bite the bullet at some stage.

 

[ajstoneservices]

That job is a joke no wonder he is no longer registered.

Best get it reinstalled before you use it.

 

[bernardgreen]

http://www.hetas.co.uk/complaints-hetas/

The email of the Chief Executive Officer is

[email protected]

Postal Address Stoke Orchard, Gloucestershire, UNITED KINGDOM, GL52 7RZ

 

[longdogs]

What's the rope all about?

 

[bernardgreen]

The rope, when fitted properly, seals the join between fire and flue. In this case the way it is fitted could be a noose for the fitter's business prospects.

 

[KenGMac]

Bill.
Strongly suggest that you use the e mail address of the CEO of HETAS, as supplied by bernardgreen, but not yet?
I for one would NOT use the installation, if it don't look right, this one does NOT then it isn't fit for purpose.
Having worked for some large firms, a CEO Complaint cuts right across the more normal plodding, evasive Customer Complaints procedures that are specifically designed to PLOD and ask questions, in effect prevaricate in an attempt to get the complainant to simply go away and not rock the corporate boat.
On another front? why not ask your local Trading Standards about the supposed HETAS registered installer, who knows this supposed installer may be known to them? this can only add weight to your claim against HETAS?
Suggest that you contact Trading Standards before you contact the CEO, why? because if the installer is known to trading standards, then the CEO of HETAS may, and I stress MAY have a difficult time of evading a claim from you as regards the HETAS guarantees, if you see where I am coming from?
One very important question to finally ask of the HETAS CEO is when did the installer who undertook the installation get his certification revoked? an important point as regards Mis-Representation, and cover as regards HETAS?

It would be of interest to if you are able to update on the results?

Ken

 

[Bill Wright]

Thanks to everyone for your suggestions and I will certainly follow those up and report back.

I have telephoned the "installer" this morning and arranged for them to come here this evening to discuss the matter. This I am told is the first line to take. Give them a chance to rectify the situation. What I intend to do in parallel is to ask Trading Standards in my local area as proposed by KenGMac and let the shot develop from there.

 

[JBR]

I'd be interested to learn what he said, and even if he managed to turn up.

 

[Bill Wright]

Okay. the installer turned up as arranged. In response to questioning about why messages left on his answer machine brought no follow-up, the excuse was that it must be a Talk Talk problem and would be chased up. In response to questioning as to why no HETAS certificate had been forthcoming, the reply was along the lines of there must be a computer problem and it'll be chased up so not to worry. (As mentioned previously, HETAS has no record of an application for certification). On enquiring about membership of HETAS, the excuse was that there was a problem with insurance and it would be sorted. Do you see a pattern developing.

Now down to the actual installation.

I said that the existing work was an eyesore and I wanted it corrected using correct offsets or equivalent (90 degree fully flexible joint for example). I had previously dropped a plumb line down and determined the rough offset measurement to be 50mm so a 15 degree pair would not be enough and a 30 degree pair would be fine as we could accommodate the fire being forward 25mm or so. I was told that all these alternatives would be inpossible as there was not room to fit any of these combinations. I'd dome my homework and the extending unit that was in place was exactly the same height as two offset bends.

I was asked what I considered to be the eyesore and I replied that the corrugated section of the pipe should invisible (ie correctly inserted so that a gas tight seal would be possible with HT silicone or fire clay and that fire rope shoiuld not be necessary. The response was to offer to cut the section at the back of the pipe so that the corrugated section at the front would sink deeper and be invisible. This would not be the solution given the ridge on the pipe. I'm now losing it! So what about the corresponding joint up the chimney? Not a problem. It's safe and I have certificated it. For a second or two I felt like resorting to physical violence but refrained (obviously as I'm not languishing in a police cell).

I've resolved to take the hit on this as the stress and strain is not worth the candle. I'll get another installer in and explain what i want and get it agreed up front before work starts. Below is the complete stack removed from the chimney showing (without the fire rope around the base) what it looked like.

This replicates what it would have looked like in the chimney. There was no fire rope around the top section by the way. Further confirmation of the BS that had been spouted. Sorry about the photo being sideways on. In the original before uploading, it is the right way up.

 

[JBR]

I know you have said that you'll opt for sorting it yourself (or by another installer), but I'd be pretty angry that the original installer will get off scott free and quite likely do the same to others.

 

[Bill Wright]

I understand your anguish JBR but my position is that I have three types of cancer, a heart problem and I'm in my 70th year so I need stress like a hole in the head. Suffice to say that the bush telegraph is already operating amongst installers and sweeps in this area and if this person gets much more work, it'll probably be spud-picking.

 

[FiremanT]

If you can prove he was HETAS registered when he did the work then I feel HETAS should ensure the work is redone to make the installation safe and that HETAS should cover all the costs as one of their approved installers has put you and your home at risk.
.

HETAS may have a dispute arbitration service, but they aren't likely to cough up for repairs. Gas Safe certainly don't, unless the installer paid for an individual job insurance policy. Even that only covers the bill if the installer is legally unable to rectify i.e. deregistered. Come to think of it, I am not even sure they still offer it. Never known any one buy one

 

[bernardgreen]

It isn't a repair, it is the correction of a bodged and dangerous installation carried out by ( it seems ) one of their "approved" installers. They approved of him,. they are culpable if his work causes harm. Though they almost certainly will have got a get out clause