Unnecessary damage caused by plumber in search of leak

[Norcon]

It shouldn't have to be leaking in the plumbers face for him to ascertain the joint is shot.

The water marking are already there and the dodgy pushfits, not several meters along the ceiling where the guy went bashing.

What knowledge did he have of the water pressures? Well none probably.
All the more reason to treat the push fits with suspicion and replace them. 10 minute job.

He left me with a 7ft x 7ft hole in my ceiling and 20+ rat holes throughout the rest of the ceiling but failed

I can't believe people are defending this guy.
Someone mentioned Tarmac. I think thats the place for him.

 

[gaspro1981]

Quote:
He left me with a 7ft x 7ft hole in my ceiling and 20+ rat holes throughout the rest of the ceiling but failed

Fooooking load of Shiate not even the two trolls commenting in this thread would cut a hole that big

 

[Onetap]

What knowledge did he have of the water pressures? Well none probably.
All the more reason to treat the push fits with suspicion and replace them. 10 minute job.

Millions of push-fits in use, they don't leak if installed properly. You may not like them, but that is no reason to replace them if they're not leaking. I don't like them either, but they sell by the millions.

He was there to find and fix a leak, not replace joints at random. When he uncovered the joint, it wasn't leaking.

 

[Johnmelad]

You could not expect a plumber to look at the ceiling, before agreeing to do the work, and say; "I will fix that for £150", since he doesn't know how long it will take to find the leak, or even that he can fix it if/when he finds it. It is hidden.

It matters not one jot if the job was for a fixed price or an hourly rate, the customer wanted the leak found and fixed.

This cowboy did not fix the leak because being incompetent could not find it.

Why did he stop looking after three hours. Why did it take three hours to punch a few holes in a ceiling. Did he use a sponge to make the holes?

When in a hole stop digging...

 

[Onetap]

It matters not one jot if the job was for a fixed price or an hourly rate, the customer wanted the leak found and fixed.

It does, this contract was not to fix the leak, it was for the work to find the leak. The OP stopped him after 3 hours.

If she wants to pursue a claim in the County Court, she'd have to convince the Registrar that he'd been negligent in not identifying a leak from a fitting that wasn't then leaking, or that he'd intentionally dragged out the hourly paid work.

Some of the ceiling may have been damaged by the leak, not by the plumber making holes. Again, a matter of opinion on which she'd have to convince the Registrar.

The very best of luck to her with that.

 

[Norcon]

You may not like them, but that is no reason to replace them if they're not leaking.

Thats not the reason I'm advocating replacing them in this case.

The plumber was shown the visible leakage area (ie -the water markings on the ceiling)

As soon as joints were located by removing material they should be immiediately suspect.
The clues were there. Had their been no clues then he might have been excused.

Verdict = Clueless plumber. ( Or fast track cowboy)

 

[bolshy]

he wanted to carry on making holes in the hallway to follow the pipework and you're 100% right, I asked him to stop and thank God I did because unbeknownst to him, he had already exposed the naughty pipe so continuing would have just caused more unnecessary damage

That's why he stopped looking - as I said, read the thread jml.

I've no doubt he asked if the water was on. I've also no doubt he asked where the water was dripping from.

Was the water on whilst he was searching? Yes.
Was the union leaking whilst he was looking? No.
Why did the OP turn the water back on in the first place when she had a burst?

Did he suggest that every push fitting he'd exposed be checked/replaced? Why would he? They weren't leaking with the water on.

The trollers here have a poor case for incompetence on his part. If you're so sure of yourselves, help the OP to sue and offer to cover her court costs. You can be "expert" witnesses.

He may have been a little inexperienced, but he wasn't given chance to finish. Some plumbers on here may or may not have charged for their time. Some may have charged less. But that is irrelevant.
He was ENTITLED to charge for his time for beginning a job agreed with the customer. He wasn't able to complete it because the customer asked him to stop. Ask the OFT, they'll tell you the same.

That, I believe, was the question in the first place.

 

[Norcon]

It does, this contract was not to fix the leak, it was for the work to find the leak. The OP stopped him after 3 hours.

So this guy needed a back up plumber to come out and fix the leak after he had located it, when he was already shown where the leak was manifesting itself.

This is getting hilarious.

Its lucky the OP stopped him after 3 hours or half the house would have been demolished. pmsl
Best he sticks to the tarmac jackhammer.

 

[Onetap]

Verdict = Clueless plumber. ( Or fast track cowboy)

If she wants to pursue a claim, she'd do better to pursue the cowboy who'd installed the dodgy push-fits *, rather than the cowboy who tried to find the leak.

The first cowboy has probably galloped off into the sunset by now.

*It wasn't Dad, was it?

 

[doitall]

Love this thread

So the OP calls the plumber out because there's a leak, all the waters on and not a leak in sight, remember it could be a leaky roof or a bath waste or just rats **** in the loft, in fact it could be anything, whats he supposed to do if everything is covered up.

Take a Worcester tupperware Bosch boiler, once a week it sings God save the Queen coughs twice and dies, 43mins later it comes back to life.

The custard phones Our very best boiler engineer Agile, how long should he wait for his £84 diagnostic fee, 20mins or 20 days, just in case.

 

[Onetap]

Love this thread

So the OP calls the plumber out because there's a leak, all the waters on and not a leak in sight, remember it could be a leaky roof or a bath waste or just rats p**s in the loft, in fact it could be anything, whats he supposed to do if everything is covered up.

Take a Worcester tupperware Bosch boiler, once a week it sings God save the Queen coughs twice and dies, 43mins later it comes back to life.

The custard phones Our very best boiler engineer Agile, how long should he wait for his £84 diagnostic fee, 20mins or 20 days, just in case.

True. I am certain that Agile could look inside the boiler, immediately identify the fault as the heat exchanger/pump/flux capacitor and know it would take him 2 minutes and 14 seconds to fix, having done countless thousands before. He could then offer the lady a fixed-price repair.

You'd be daft to offer a fixed-price repair for a concealed leak. I refer m'learned friends to the relevant case law, involving Napoleon's Piano.

 

[doitall]

You'd be daft to offer a fixed-price repair for a concealed leak. I refer m'learned friends to the relevant case law, involving Napoleon's Piano.

Is that the one that fell 10 stories in a comedy sketch

 

[FiremanT]

I can't take this thread seriously. Perfect Pete hasn't contributed yet

 

[D_Hailsham]

The OP hasn't made a contribution to this thread since last Sunday.

I suspect she has already decided what to do, so everyone might as well give up posting.

 

[Norcon]

The OP's plumber should have used divining rods.
He would probably have stood a better chance of finding water.