Biritsh Gas Homecare - safety check ok now boiler condemned!

WoolyB

Hi,
Firstly apologies if this is the wrong forum for this thread but it was the closest match I could find.


I am looking to find if anyone has had any experience (or success) taking on British Gas (Scottish Gas but essentially it's BG)?


I have the Homecare 200 agreement and for ages I have had problems with the pressure in my system dropping. I took out Homecare and over the years had quite a few parts replaced in my boiler, all ok. Pressure still drops though and now I find water under my 16 year old boiler.


It's time to get my annual safety check and this is done on the 10th July - engineer is very chatty (too chatty!) and he does the service check and tells me although the boiler is old it's running better than some new boilers and all parts are available for it, so he puts on his checklist, all working safe etc and not recommended to replace boiler. I told him about the pressure and water issue and he replied - don't worry it will just be the overflow as the pressure changes, all ok!


The water has happened again a few times since then and the boiler needed reset a couple of times before it would fire up, but it always worked. But I've just sold my house and thought I'd better get an engineer out to look at it so I know it's all ok - after all I have service cover.
Well does he not come through after 10 minutes with the glum face telling me he needed to shut the boiler down as the inside was corroded and there were holes from the combustion chamber and it constituted as a danger to life. !!!!!!????


I told him it was just serviced and all was ok so how can it now be the other extreme and you can imagine the usual slopey shoulders replies.


Now I need to fork out thousands for a new boiler before I move out but surely BG should be liable for something?


Surely the service engineer was negligent as he was told of a problem and he didn't investigate and he left the boiler in an unsafe state - anything could have happened as fumes could have escaped.


I'm not sure how far I can push this with BG and I am not disputing I need to replace the boiler but if I knew it needed a new one 2 months ago I would have done it then before the house went up for sale but my gripe is how can it be ok in July to dangerous in September.


Has anyone experienced anything similar or does anyone have any advice on how best to approach this with BG? I've logged a complaint but I assume it will fall on deaf ears and they will inevitably all get their stories straight!


Thanks in advance

cono1717

Without proof that but for the fact that British Gas fixed any problems two months ago this problem would not of occurred I don't think they are liable for anything. The only thing they didn't do was condemn it earlier - if they had you would of still had to replace it.

I'm not a boiler expert but surely this would fall the same way an MOT does. Your car may pass its inspection just fine but then have a fault with something that wasn't inspected that could cause the thing to blow up the next day - that doesn't mean the MOT test centre are liable for something they didn't check - unless they were required to check it.

I do however think it is worth reporting to them to say that this was a catastrophically dangerous miss from the original engineer.

WoolyB

Hi cono1717


Agree, I would have probably had to replace it 2 months ago but that would have given me some time and not having to rush and change it 1 week after a house sale going through, unnecessary pressure and I have to notify the purchasers (although I don't suppose they'll be bothered, they'll be delighted to have a shiney new boiler).


My big concern is that BG have potentially exposed me and my family to danger of fumes/gas etc by the negligence of the first engineer.


BG's defence yesterday was - "maybe the corrosion wasn't there 2 months ago". Maybe not but I doubt it and even if it wasn't there, he was highlighted to the water leak and forgive me if I am being silly but it's water which causes corrosion so by the same token, if he had discovered and fixed the issue behind the water leak then perhaps the corrosion would not have occurred and the boiler would not be condemned. The engineer yesterday was able to tell me the leak was coming from the hot water element of the boiler, so clearly pretty easy to spot.


Am I clutching at straws?

wealdroam

WoolyB wrote: »

Hi cono1717


Agree, I would have probably had to replace it 2 months ago but that would have given me some time and not having to rush and change it 1 week after a house sale going through, unnecessary pressure and I have to notify the purchasers (although I don't suppose they'll be bothered, they'll be delighted to have a shiney new boiler).


My big concern is that BG have potentially exposed me and my family to danger of fumes/gas etc by the negligence of the first engineer.


BG's defence yesterday was - "maybe the corrosion wasn't there 2 months ago". Maybe not but I doubt it and even if it wasn't there, he was highlighted to the water leak and forgive me if I am being silly but it's water which causes corrosion so by the same token, if he had discovered and fixed the issue behind the water leak then perhaps the corrosion would not have occurred and the boiler would not be condemned. The engineer yesterday was able to tell me the leak was coming from the hot water element of the boiler, so clearly pretty easy to spot.


Am I clutching at straws?

Yes you are clutching at straws.

There seem to be too many 'if's and 'maybe's there.

There is absolutely no way that you can prove that the fault should've been apparent to the earlier service engineer.

cono1717

If you wanted to seek any form of remittance from them you'd have to prove they were negligent in missing the corrosion when the inspection first occurred. Sadly they are 100% correct, maybe it wasn't there 2 months ago"

The only thing I think you'd potentially have in your back is the following:

You'd need a independent report saying that component A can cause the corrosion shown if faulty over a period of > 2 months.
Component A should of been inspected when the first service was complete.

If that happens you could then argue that British Gas should of noticed the fault during their inspection and but for that fact you'd of had it repaired thus not costing you a new boiler.

Seems like a lot of hassle for a potential opposite outcome though.

Fluff15

wealdroam wrote: »

Yes you are clutching at straws.

There seem to be too many 'if's and 'maybe's there.

There is absolutely no way that you can prove that the fault should've been apparent to the earlier service engineer.

Exactly. If his combustion readings at the time were at the correct levels, then it's extremely unlikely your family would have been exposed to CO from the boiler. What exactly do you expect them to be liable for, when nothing bad happened?

Nothing did happen apart from you needing a new boiler at a slightly more inconvenient time of your life. Get some CO monitors if you haven't already. Gas appliances can fail at any time.

unholyangel

Fluff15 wrote: »

Exactly. If his combustion readings at the time were at the correct levels, then it's extremely unlikely your family would have been exposed to CO from the boiler. What exactly do you expect them to be liable for, when nothing bad happened?

Nothing did happen apart from you needing a new boiler at a slightly more inconvenient time of your life. Get some CO monitors if you haven't already. Gas appliances can fail at any time.

They won't always alert you when there is a leak.

My boiler was condemned at the beginning of the year. Engineer said it should have never have passed last year as there was a rubber grommet missing and the engineer last year had just put tape around it - which was still letting the fumes escape.

The CO monitor is 2m away from the boiler and was fitted just 3 months previous to the boiler being condemned.

Like OP I was told it could have been fatal - although likely wasnt due to my insistence on always keeping a window open to circulate fresh air. I didn't - and have no plans to - ask for compensation though - I'm still here and none the worse for wear. Plus the boiler was around 20 years old :rotfl:

societys_child

They won't always alert you when there is a leak.

The monitor wont alarm until the fumes reach a certain level. Presumably, because you had the windows open, the level to active the alarm was never reached.

pinkshoes

Ultimately, the boiler was going to har to be replaced, but this has just happened at an inconvenient time.

Sh*t happens, so just go with the availabke options:

1. Replace the boiler -my can pick what you like.
2. Ask the buyers if they would accept money off the sale due to the boiler not working. Boiler price plus extra for inconvenience.

At least it lasted 16 years. In our last house our boiler died at 7 years old and the parts were obsolete, so we had to pay for a replacement!

bris

unholyangel wrote: »

They won't always alert you when there is a leak.

They will if there is deadly CO in the air, that's what they are for. The fact it didn't go off meant there was no risk.

unholyangel

bris wrote: »

They will if there is deadly CO in the air, that's what they are for. The fact it didn't go off meant there was no risk.

According to the engineer, it should have went off. I didn't ask him what the exact readings were, but he did say they were fatal. He was surprised at it not going off both with how close it is to the boiler and also with how new it was.

Carbon monoxide detectors start going off around 50ppm. The ppm required to have any significantly adverse affects is much much higher than that.

I'm just saying I wouldn't rely on one to let you know theres a leak.