Taylor Wimpey House Issues

jkdt0077

Hi

I'm hoping somebody can offer me advice on the problems we've been having with our Taylor Wimpey built house. We have had the house for just over 3 years now so it is out of their normal 2 year warranty. However, last month our boiler failed completely and we have no central heating and hot water only via immersion heater.

We had an engineer come out from Corillion Energy, who stated that the fault was due to "poor installation" in his words. So this is the case we put forward to Taylor Wimpey, in order to have them repair it. They have been extremely awkward though, and kept asking for further details from the engineer, which is why it has taken so long to get to where we are now.

The last thing they asked for was a reason, from our engineer, as to why he felt the fault was caused by poor installation and we eventually got this in writing a couple of days ago. This, however, still wasn't enough for Taylor Wimpey, who then insisted they send their own engineer out to get another opinion. Their engineer came out today and spent no more than 5 minutes, basically just had a quick look at the water tank and the boiler and trotted off back to Wimpey with the report "the boiler is installed to Wimpey's standards". Because of this they have said they will take no further action.

What I'm wondering is where can I take this now? Do I have any legal case against Wimpey? We have one engineer's word (a completely independent 3rd party) who stated the fault was due to poor installation - against the word of Taylor Wimpey's own engineer who stated the installation was up to Taylor Wimpey's standards (:rotfl:)

We've been without heating for nearly 6 weeks now trying to get this sorted. We've been obstructed at every point by the Taylor Wimpey customer service team and now just need to get this sorted ASAP.

Thanks for any advice anyone might have

Dan

DVardysShadow

So what is actually [alleged] to be wrong? You need to come to a firm conclusion as to what is actually wrong and whose responsibility it is - then act accordingly.

jkdt0077

Thanks for the responses.

"So what is actually [alleged] to be wrong? You need to come to a firm conclusion as to what is actually wrong and whose responsibility it is - then act accordingly."

The water tank upstairs began leaking, but by the time we had noticed it and stopped the leak, what had apparently happened is that the system emptied, the pump continued to run and overheated, and all pressure was lost through the system. This is what Taylor Wimpey's engineer reported back to his office today.

The previous engineer also stated the above, but expanded on that by saying that the leak was caused because the wrong piping is installed (in his opinion of course) - specifically 8-10mm microbore flexipipe, instead of 15mm copper piping. This, he believes, could have caused a blockage in the system, which led to the above consequences.

Taylor Wimpey read out to me their own engineer's report and I responded with the question "what caused the leak?" - to which they had no answer.

I can imagine this being a common experience - as they are crap!

Thanks,
Dan

jkdt0077

Hi copa,

I have stated that I will be seeking legal action in an email to them. Is that enough, or is a full written, posted letter required?

wealdroam

copa_feela wrote: »

Write a formal letter to them, and give them 14 days to respond. There are lots of templates online for what to put. Stick to the facts, in particular noting that you have established the system is inherently faulty, and state what resolution you expect.

Just to add to that...

Send it recorded delivery.

Entitle it Letter Before Action.

Also spell out what will happen if they do not react appropriately within the timeframe you have specified... i.e. you will instruct another firm to repair the system and start legal action to recover the repair costs.

An LBA is the first part of the formal process.

jkdt0077

Thanks for the advice guys. Will get a letter written up tomorrow.

Dan

DVardysShadow

copa_feela wrote: »

..

copa_feela wrote: »

..

wealdroam wrote: »

..

On the legal procedure, I would agree.

But on the facts of this, I am less than convinced.

If Corillion were a contractor in a position to quote for the repair work, their expert could be discredited for having an interest in showing that TW had installed the system wrongly.

And while a tank leak is undesirable, I cannot see that it would cause a boiler failure. Could it be that Corillion for their own reasons have said that the boiler is terminally broken to get the job to replace it? And 'helpfully' providing [useless] 'ammunition' to get TW to fund it.

As for microbore flexipipe being used instead of 15mm copper, it does depend on which actual runs are alleged to be wrongly piped.

So far I am only believing that TW may be responsible for a pipe leak. I am thinking that any other installer at worst would need to fit a new heat exchanger and sort out the leak.

Sorry jkdt0077 if this is not what you want to hear, but I fear that TW will dismiss your complaint because Corillion's technical advice is wrong and will wipe you out if you took it to court.

Not that I think TW are faultless here - I think they are at fault, but not the faults Corillion are telling you.

Before you go down the Letter Before Action route, I suggest you post your problem from a Technical Perspective [and leave out the Legal Perspective] on the DIY forum http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39 to really get to the bottom of the technical case.

jkdt0077

Hi DVardysShadow

I understand what you are saying, however, I think on this occasion the Corillion engineer is actually being 100% genuine. The slight backstory to this is that we actually tried to make a claim on our insurance for the original leak and so Axa sent out the Corillion engineer. It later turned out that our insurance didn't cover boiler repairs and so we couldn't make a claim anyway. It was then that we turned to Wimpey because of the Corillion engineer's comments.

Even now, several weeks after Corillion found out that they would not be getting the job, they are still trying to help us, and the engineer in question is still willing to back up his opinion. He is (apparently) Corillion's most senior engineer and should really know what he's talking about.

I think this is why our case is so strong and from what I've read microbore flexipipe is mostly used because it is a cheaper, easier solution to install, but is most definitely not always appropriate.

jkdt0077

Also, both engineers appear to agree that the original leak is the likely cause of the subsequent problems... the question really seems to stem around what might have caused the leak. The Taylor Wimpey engineer neglected to address this point, whereas the Corillion engineer maintains that incorrect piping is a highly probably cause of the leak.

DVardysShadow

copa_feela wrote: »

The problem that the OP describes is commonplace in new builds, for personal reasons I have done a lot of research in this area. Plus I have checked my understanding with my dad, a plumber, and he agrees with my interpretation (always check these things with my dad, I'm too much of a girl for all things technical!).

The fact is that any "expert opinion" is going to have some level of bias, in that they are going to be paid by one of the parties. The district judge will decide who has a more valid/ unbiased opinion on the balance of probabilities, and of the two opinions, the Corillion* plumber is the more independent of the two.

* Are you sure it is not Carillion?

I am going on what the OP says as to it being Corillion.

My dad having been a plumber taught me a lot. Now, what we have here is a less than coherent technical narrative from the OP as to how and why the boiler failed. We have snippets and factoids.

On the whole, I do believe that it arises from poor workmanship by TW, insofar as the tank leaked. But the rest of it - whether the boiler is genuinely a complete write off, or is actually serviceable or may be repaired with minor or major component replacement - whether the explanations about the pipe used are relevant or not we do not know.

The signs are that TW would defend this quite vigorously. And if the justification for a claim is false, even if some claim is justified, I would expect TW to fight very hard. Corillion are motivated by the desire to get the boiler replacement job. TW are motivated by the desire not to be seen as a soft touch by chancers looking for boiler replacement work.

So measure how motivated the 2 parties will be in court. This is OP's technical expert, Corillion, spending a lot of time and a possible court appearance for 1 boiler replacement vs TW, determined to avoid many boiler replacements.

If OP is to go forward with this, his technical case has to be a load better. I would expect it to stand scrutiny on the DIY forum and I would expect him to have a full grasp of the arguments.

And if his claim is really for a leak repair plus some replacement parts on a boiler, he will very likely end up with nothing from the court if he claims for a whole new boiler - when if he made the right claim technically, he would probably win - and quite likely in correspondence with TW rather than in court.

Sorry, on this one, the legals look right, but technically OP looks primed by Corillion to fall flat on his face.

jkdt0077

DVardysShadow, sorry maybe I have not been totally clear. Both engineers agree that the cause of the boiler not working was down to the initial leak. The leak caused the system to empty, causing the pressure in the system to drop. The pump, however, continued running causing the impeller to overheat and eventually broke. Now, when the boiler is turned on it overheats and cuts out because there is no circulation from the pump. Does this make sense?

So, both engineers agree that the leak was the cause of the system not working.. the question is how could the leak have happened in the first place? It seems to me that this has to be due to either poor installation or poor quality equipment - and the, now unbiased (because they are not getting the job, they ONLY work through our insurance company - we can't even contact them without going through our insurance company who have said that they won't carry out the work as it's not covered under our policy), Carillion engineer has offered the only other explanation that the incorrect piping could have caused a blockage in the system, and consequently lead to the leak.

Do you still think that TW have a strong case?