Who is liable for plumbing damage….

cherrypie53

Hi, a plumber came today to replace two faulty components in my boiler as we have no hot water. He fitted one new component, then In trying to remove the other faulty component, which was seized up, he damaged two other components which are now leaking and now also need replacing. He was unable to remove the initial component. He went away and will telephone me with quotes for the other two parts that I now need. Two questions:

Can you please tell me who is liable for these other two parts that the plumber damaged whilst trying to remove the faulty component?

If I opt for a new boiler with this plumber, who is liable for the new first part he was able to install in my present boiler before he had trouble with the second part, thus incurring damage to two other components? If I opt for a new boiler, obviously the part he was able to install will be disposed of, so should I be paying for that? Advice welcome.

JJ_Egan

He is liable in the first instance , but may well claim that the parts are damaged due to the fact they where seized .

You are liable for the first part .

Really this will be a case of negotiated with the plumber .

cx6

In for example car repairs, if things are seized and other components are damaged by the garage mechanic in order to remove the seized part, the customer gets billed for everything 

pinkshoes

cherrypie53 said:

Hi, a plumber came today to replace two faulty components in my boiler as we have no hot water. He fitted one new component, then In trying to remove the other faulty component, which was seized up, he damaged two other components which are now leaking and now also need replacing. He was unable to remove the initial component. He went away and will telephone me with quotes for the other two parts that I now need. Two questions:

Can you please tell me who is liable for these other two parts that the plumber damaged whilst trying to remove the faulty component?

If I opt for a new boiler with this plumber, who is liable for the new first part he was able to install in my present boiler before he had trouble with the second part, thus incurring damage to two other components? If I opt for a new boiler, obviously the part he was able to install will be disposed of, so should I be paying for that? Advice welcome.

The damage is likely to have occurred due to the faulty component being seized. This seized part is not the fault of the plumber. He did not deliberately damage the other parts, nor does it seem that he was negligible either.

If it wasn't seized it wouldn't need replacing, and as it was seized the plumber did their best to remove it which inevitably damaged something else.

The only other option would have been declaring that he would not be able to remove the part that was seized, in which case your only option would then be a new boiler. 

I would see what the plumber says, and if a new boiler is needed, then negotiate a price for it.

Sandtree

To make him liable you need to show his negligence, ie he failed to exercise due care, the reality can be when components break that there is a significant risk of other damage when attempting to fix it and in the world of miniaturisation it becomes and increasing material risk. 

In an ideal world he'd have warned you before that trying to remove a siezed component could cause further damage but what would you have done then? Lived with a non-functional boiler or had the work done anyway?

Aylesbury_Duck

I agree with the others.  Sometimes an old or seized part can't be accessed, serviced or replaced without damaging other things.  The alternative would be for him to leave it unfixed, and then what would you do?

How old is the boiler, and when was it last serviced?  Not the rubbishy poke-a-probe-in-the-flue activity a lot of the boiler cover services carry out, a proper service where it's taken apart and cleaned?

bris

The seized part requires highe pressure to unseize, the problem with that is when it eventually goes there is no way of stopping the momentum so anything near takes a hit. No ones fault just bad luck.

Manxman_in_exile

We had an immersion heater go and I had a plumber and an electrician look at it.  They both agreed that it was seized in place on the hot water tank and that they might cause a lot more damage trying to remove it and might even rupture the water tank

As we had more than enough hot water from the gas boiler we were happy to leave it untouched.  If we hadn't had any hot water, we would have had to run the risk of losing the whole tank and accept the cost.  Nobody at fault.  Just one of those things...

Ergates

Agree.   As long as the damage occurred during what a competent person might consider to be a reasonable method of removing the seized component then it's just an unfortunate side effect of the initial fault.

cherrypie53

Thanks so much for your replies everyone. It’s given me some insight and direction, so much appreciated.

The boiler is old at 12 years and has had a full, proper service every year, the last one just two months ago. This is the first time it’s ever had a fault. The plumber that installed it and has ever since always done the servicing is away for a few weeks. 

Anyway, I’m not placing blame on the plumber who damaged the other parts, I just wanted to know what the situation might be. I think the expedient thing to do is to probably go for a new boiler considering the age of this one.

Thanks again for all your replies.

born_again

12 year old boiler. I would get a new one installed. 

https://www.worcester-bosch.co.uk/gas-boilers-banned-2025