Boiler question - Losing deposit

EachPenny

Hopetobedebtfree wrote: »

update - wondered if anyone had any thoughts? We got a copy of the invoice today which contained the following overview of the cause and work needed to repair...


A seized pump, fair enough. All of that work... is taking the proverbial!

The important bit is whether it is reasonable for you to be held liable for any of it.

ComicGeek

EachPenny wrote: »

I'm not sure this is the precise model the OP has, but it seems close -
https://www.worcester-bosch.co.uk/professional/support/documents/greenstar-cdi-classic-combi-operating-instructions

Page 17 -
If you isolate the power to the boiler then the anti-seizure system cannot operate. Leave the boiler isolated long enough then the pump will seize. If it would take months to happen WB would have designed the system to only do an anti-seize run once a week or so. They've designed it to run every 24 hours. You can conclude that a few days, maybe a week of not running the anti-seize protection due to power isolation could be enough for the pump to seize.

It's not rubbish or nonsense - it is a fact. The claim is plausible.

If the OP's model is the same or similar to the one above, then the claim is also supported by information in the manufacturer's instructions.

No, it's every 24 hrs because that's a simple timer function - trying to do it once a month would require a more complicated timer function which would be more liable to fail.

The issue is leaving a pump not running for months, not a few weeks. Your conclusion is wrong, it's not fact.

jbainbridge

Was the deposit protected in a scheme?

Is there a valid gas certificate?

Hopetobedebtfree

jbainbridge wrote: »

Was the deposit protected in a scheme?

Is there a valid gas certificate?

It is protected and there is a valid gas certificate

EachPenny

ComicGeek wrote: »

No, it's every 24 hrs because that's a simple timer function - trying to do it once a month would require a more complicated timer function which would be more liable to fail.

The issue is leaving a pump not running for months, not a few weeks. Your conclusion is wrong, it's not fact.

A firmware program that triggers an event once a week is more likely to fail than one triggering every day? Are you serious?

A boiler's control logic has far more complex things to worry about in comparison to remembering to do something once a week... that is a trivial function to implement.

But it is simple - the boiler was presumably fitted with an anti-seize system, it doesn't work if the power is switched off. In the same way that frost protection wouldn't work if there was no power to the system. If the OP was told not to switch the boiler off, or if the instructions made it clear this was an unsafe thing to do then there might be some liability for damage to the pump... but there are lots of 'ifs' involved in that.

Clairabella

I fail to see how it matters whether the power being turned off caused the boiler fault or not.

The OP was expecting a cleaner after they had vacated the property. The cleaner would need electricity for vacuum etc so I'm sure that OP would not have turned off the power. I find it hard to believe a cleaner would bother to turn it off. So, the last person in the property was the letting agent. Presumably they were not expecting new tenants immediately, so, possibly thinking they were doing the correct thing to protect the property may have turned off the power. I think that the OP should simply refuse to accept responsibility for the power being switched off and let the landlord try to prove that it was them.

Hopetobedebtfree

EachPenny wrote: »

A firmware program that triggers an event once a week is more likely to fail than one triggering every day? Are you serious?

A boiler's control logic has far more complex things to worry about in comparison to remembering to do something once a week... that is a trivial function to implement.

But it is simple - the boiler was presumably fitted with an anti-seize system, it doesn't work if the power is switched off. In the same way that frost protection wouldn't work if there was no power to the system. If the OP was told not to switch the boiler off, or if the instructions made it clear this was an unsafe thing to do then there might be some liability for damage to the pump... but there are lots of 'ifs' involved in that.

Thank you both for your input. Despite the issue being blamed on a seized pump initially it appears from the invoice that at least part of the issue was a failed ignition sensor. I don't believe that this could have been foreseen and there is def nothing regarding this in the instruction manual. Mind you we were never provided with one nor where we told not to turn the switch off

Hopetobedebtfree

Clairabella wrote: »

I fail to see how it matters whether the power being turned off caused the boiler fault or not.

The OP was expecting a cleaner after they had vacated the property. The cleaner would need electricity for vacuum etc so I'm sure that OP would not have turned off the power. I find it hard to believe a cleaner would bother to turn it off. So, the last person in the property was the letting agent. Presumably they were not expecting new tenants immediately, so, possibly thinking they were doing the correct thing to protect the property may have turned off the power. I think that the OP should simply refuse to accept responsibility for the power being switched off and let the landlord try to prove that it was them.

Thanks clarabel. We did consider this but as the pictures on the check out report show that the boiler was switched off at check out (and up until this point we were still responsible for the property) it was a jon starter. We chose not to attend the check out - although we would never have thought to check the boiler switch so that's probably a moot point

molerat

Hopetobedebtfree wrote: »

update - wondered if anyone had any thoughts? We got a copy of the invoice today which contained the following overview of the cause and work needed to repair

Boiler issue: Boiler has been turned off previously allowing any debris to settle and set. And on turning back on has blown/shorted overheat ssors and ignition sensor. Following works have to be carried out in order to get the boiler working again:

Isolate water and gas drain down boiler. Remove boiler from property and bring to merchants for full strip down clear out and flushout as pump, plate heat exchanger and primary heat exchanger are faulty due to sludge. 
Parts replaced: Ch Pump, Aav, Plate heat exchanger, Overheat sensor, ignition sensor, Divertor Valve service and complete strip down of all internal water carrying pipework and primary heat exchanger.
Reassemble boiler and powerflush and inhibitor.
This has had to be done OFF SITE because of the magnitude of 






It looks to me that the LL has shot himself in the foot by sending you the invoice. The system has not been properly maintained and is sludged up causing the failure.

Hopetobedebtfree

molerat wrote: »

It looks to me that the LL has shot himself in the foot by sending you the invoice. The system has not been properly maintained and is sludged up causing the failure.

Do you know how long sludge takes to build up? Could it be argued that it happened in the few days that the power was off?