Hi Guys
I've had a Scottish Power boiler engineer void my boiler cover within just a few minutes of his visit without examining it in any detail:
His report states
1) The heat exchanger is full of sludge ( he didn't remove a single pipe so how could he know this ? )
2) Flue Seals have perished ( he visually noticed some condensation inside the flue )
3) Combustion door seal is perished ( some smoke came of his oily finger prints after touching it )
4) Burner seal has perished POcs are escaping ( some smoke came of his oily finger prints after touching it )
I was there during the engineers visit and it was a complete farce and he literally spent 5 minutes purely looking for contract exclusions rather then trying to repair the boiler, I have a court case this Friday and will have an opportunity to question or try and discredit his report.
Can anyone advise some questions I could raise at the court hearing to try and show he didn't carry out a thorough enough check, for instance should he have used a gas analysis machine to show/prove the flue was recirculating fumes back into the intake rather then just making a visual check ? I'm just looking for some insight on further checks he should have made before jumping to some pretty extreme assumptions.
I've had a Scottish Power boiler engineer void my boiler cover within just a few minutes of his visit without examining it in any detail:
His report states
1) The heat exchanger is full of sludge ( he didn't remove a single pipe so how could he know this ? )
2) Flue Seals have perished ( he visually noticed some condensation inside the flue )
3) Combustion door seal is perished ( some smoke came of his oily finger prints after touching it )
4) Burner seal has perished POcs are escaping ( some smoke came of his oily finger prints after touching it )
I was there during the engineers visit and it was a complete farce and he literally spent 5 minutes purely looking for contract exclusions rather then trying to repair the boiler, I have a court case this Friday and will have an opportunity to question or try and discredit his report.
Can anyone advise some questions I could raise at the court hearing to try and show he didn't carry out a thorough enough check, for instance should he have used a gas analysis machine to show/prove the flue was recirculating fumes back into the intake rather then just making a visual check ? I'm just looking for some insight on further checks he should have made before jumping to some pretty extreme assumptions.