A cautionary tale

lemontart

Terrylw1 wrote: »

It does state that the court heard that the homeowner agreed the work after being informed the guy wasn't registered. So, perhaps it hasn't been considered because the case is only against the tradesman?

Regardless of their injuries and insurance issues, I wouldn't care since they caused damage to neighbours properties that had to be demolished. I would expect to see the homeowners in court for that!

I'm guessing its because the HSE have taken it to court so the homeowner is "not in our remit".

Yes my thoughts exactly insurance and hse two different things. Looking at all the reports on hse especially the gas ones they do all appear to be against the person who actually did the work who appear to be tradesmen or claiming to be registered.

Here is further reading in plain english on what is permitted under the law
http://www.gassaferegister.co.uk/PDF/Who%20can%20legally%20work%20on%20a%20gas%20appliance.pdf

Pincher

lemontart wrote: »

I cannot possibly comment about your plastering etc - I work for the gas emergency service and hear all too often of cases where in an effort to save money or other reasons.

I am just saying you have no control over the "appointed" workers, and "respectable" big names can be just as bad as slum landlords.

It is interesting to note that it is hard to trace the fault to car insurer's appointed repairers, if you have a big accident after a repair, and your mangled body is fused with the car, so all evidence of shoddy work is erased.

Polioce Verdict: Poor car maintenance, so it's your own fault!?

lemontart

Pincher wrote: »

I am just saying you have no control over the "appointed" workers, and "respectable" big names can be just as bad as slum landlords.

It is interesting to note that it is hard to trace the fault to car insurer's appointed repairers, if you have a big accident after a repair, and your mangled body is fused with the car, so all evidence of shoddy work is erased.

Polioce Verdict: Poor car maintenance, so it's your own fault!?

that may well be the case but in the case illustrated on hse website this was not what happened - should similar happen with those appointed to do works following a claim to an insurance company then I am sure we would see a whole other set of people facing the wrath of hse - and as this is the gas and electricity forum the post relates to gas not plastering - though would be interesting to see what the outcome would be in such a case

Pincher

It's always the same theme: if I'm not living in that house, it's somebody else's life. The HomeServe manager will still save money, just like the slum landlord. Until you start handing out death sentence for slum landlords and insurance executives, nothing will change.

Counter measure
______________

The corporate reaction will be to recruit rubber stamping executives who are set up as the fall guy. The slimy landord will marry a wife who doesn't speak English, to be the figure head that goes to the electric chair. Inherit the properties on death of spouse, with no tax to pay. Marry another idiot, register the company to her, start again.

Terrylw1

lemontart wrote: »

Yes my thoughts exactly insurance and hse two different things. Looking at all the reports on hse especially the gas ones they do all appear to be against the person who actually did the work who appear to be tradesmen or claiming to be registered.

Here is further reading in plain english on what is permitted under the law
http://www.gassaferegister.co.uk/PDF/Who%20can%20legally%20work%20on%20a%20gas%20appliance.pdf

Since it even states both parties are breaking the law where a tradesman carries out work that is signed off later by a gas safe engineer, I don't think the 3rd party should be left out of charges since they could be a knowing party to the crime.

Just doesn't make sense.

lemontart

Terrylw1 wrote: »

Since it even states both parties are breaking the law where a tradesman carries out work that is signed off later by a gas safe engineer, I don't think the 3rd party should be left out of charges since they could be a knowing party to the crime.

Just doesn't make sense.

True but I do not know how hse deal with such i.e if the occupier does the work and not a trades person or as in this case the occupier gives express permission, possibly they could argue the guy in question knows he is not qualified or licensed so should have said no - which he should have done.

Terrylw1

lemontart wrote: »

True but I do not know how hse deal with such i.e if the occupier does the work and not a trades person or as in this case the occupier gives express permission, possibly they could argue the guy in question knows he is not qualified or licensed so should have said no - which he should have done.

I would have though it would be criminal damage given the severity but there are the laws covering chattels hence not really classed as criminal.

You've got to feel sorry for the neighbours. Perhaps its under chattels hence becomes a private action.

Still doesn't feel right though, in a criminal case the court wouldn't let them off.

C_Mababejive

Quite an interesting report in that the individual got off with such a light sentence. One might have thought that given the kind of sentences given to GSRs who blunder,he would have received a custodial sentence.

Given that the housholder accepts that they allowed and paid an unqualified individual to do the work, i wouldnt be surprised if the home insurers pull the plug on it.

I wouldnt blame them.

Also i do wish the HSE would make up its mind. One minute its "gas fitters" the next minute its "gas Engineers"..which is it to be? Good that they clarified the law in that you do not have to be GSR to do gas work as long as you are competent and it is not for pay/employment.

GSR is not a guarantee of safety or quality.

Terrylw1

The case didn't prove that the homeowner new, just that the guy doing the work says they did. If the homeowner was involved, they would have to decide whether this was the case.

The insurers will probably be able to prove liability by the homeowner not checking they were a GSR I would have thought.