Advice re CW cistern in 'direct supply'

[The Bedwetter]

Hi guys

Last week I carried out what I expected to be a small task, replacing a bath/shower mixer at a flat which has a combi-boiler. As there was no isolation valve on the cold supply to the bath I had to turn off the supplying stopcock. Unfortunately, what transpired was that the cold supply to the bathroom was fed from a cistern located in a loft in the top floor flat of the property. Anyway, I drained the cistern and carried out the work as well as installing a valve on the pipe. Of course, as careful as I tried to fill the cistern I ended up with an air-lock. I now required access to the loft area which was not available as the occupants were absent. I tried covering the mixer outlet with my hand and opening the hot supply but it was unable to shift the air in the pipe. Eventually I was able to borrow a spare key from another neighbour which allowed me into the flat and loft. Even at this stage access was miniscule and it took some while to establish which cistern served which flat. Despite several attempts to blow water down the distribution pipe it took a couple of hours before the air-lock would shift and water would run through the pipe to the bath.

So what should have been a job normally requiring 1 to 2 hours to complete ended up taking most of the day for reasons outside my control. Now the customer (who lives elsewhere) who I have invoiced has kicked up a fuss because of the time taken and obvious extra cost.

I need to respond to this forthwith, but I have question that you might be able to advise on. Though the said pipework configuration arrangement flies in the face of ‘good practice’ from a common sense viewpoint, is there technically any breach in Building Regs having a CW cistern supplying what should be from the mains? I have had a quick browse but can find nothing relevant.

Any views much appreciated. Thanks. :smile:

TBW

 

[BLOD]

i use a wetvac to suck airlocks out - works nearly every time

 

[WaterTight]

You got unlucky - but that's exactly how plumbing goes...

a) Did you not offer a fixed price and instead tell him what your hourly rate would be?
b) Did you mention it should take a couple of hours but rarely complications can lead to a longer period of time?

If yes to both of those he should pay up. As far as I know there is no rule that says a bath should be supplied from mains. Most, in my experience, aren't. Obviously it being a combi you presume it would be. But personally if the mains didn't turn off the cold supply to the bath I'd be wanting to at least have a peak at the tank before draining down. I didn't used to but problem jobs changed my methods. Not that looking at it would have led you to believe it was going to be airlock city. Just got to take jobs like this as inevitable blots on the landscape. They also remind you why we charge a fair old whack.

 

[WaterTight]

Where do you stick the vac onto Blod?

 

[BLOD]

shove it onto the tap spout, if it's a stuborn airlock use a towel to make a better seal around tap.

 

[SimonG]

I have a line on my estimate that states 'The above price is an estimate only and is not a final invoice.'.
But it's always difficult when it's a remote customer.

Can't understand why a combi was fitted and the cold left tanked?

At the end of the day you can either bill him for the job and the extra time or come to some agreement. Bearing in mind that the customer probably is aware (if had works done previously) that this is an issue and has kicked up a stink I would be going for payment in full. He/she didn't make sure you had access to the 'full' system.

 

[WaterTight]

Do you give written estimates for tap changes Simon?

 

[SimonG]

Unless it's an emergency or breakdown then it's a written estimate. I carry some undated blanks in the van just incase I need one in a hurry. I try and keep everything recorded, gives me as much protection as the customer.

 

[The Bedwetter]

BLOD: I do agree that a wetvac might have been useful, but I still would have preferred to actually see the cistern prior beforehand. Or do you think it is safe to use regardless?
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Watertight:
a) I was called by the tenant on behalf of the landlord. No discussion at all about price or hourly rates. I had carried out a small job for the owner a few months back.
b) It was pretty much understood that it would be a small(ish) job. There was little discussion as to what the job entailed beforehand. I did not meet the tenant until much later in the day as I picked the keys up from a neighbour.

I agree about wanting to see the cistern that you wish to drain, though.
__________________________________________________________________________________________

SimonG: As said above there was no estimate given.

No, I don’t understand why the cistern was there at all – it should have been properly decommissioned when the combi was installed. Perhaps, though, somebody was of the notion that a tank-fed combi was viable? Cannot see how, though, as being only two floors up there would scarcely been sufficient head to fire-up. Yes, true – if they have had previous problems then full access should have been provided

 

[Ian10261]

As far as i know theres been no breach of the regs but i see it as bad practice. I've seen the configuration two or three times over the years and each time the mains pressure and flow haS been crap, leading me to believe the nugget who decided a combi was best has realised he's just screwed up big time and is trying to salvage a desperate situation. FFS, do these people not know how to use a flow cup or even own one for that matter?? Rant over with.:6: