D2 pipework

[simjohnson]

HI
I bought a converted apartment in a mill block 5 years ago. I have an unvented boiler (electric). After a recent problem my plumber identified that the pipework from the tundish to the outside vent is the wrong size reduces from 22m to 15 mm pipe which runs for about 4 and a half metres before venting through the exterior wall as an open pipe (vents to the car park 25 foot below). Local building control have told me the pipework should be 22mm and that those were the regs at the time of the conversion. The developer who sold me the property says I should have discovered it in the 1st two years and won't help. The 15 mm pipework was not visible before I had the leak and only became apparent after I removed paneling to ensure the area of the leak dried out. Is the pipework as fitted likely to be a danger or cause more problems. Any views would be helpful as I'm debating whether to take the developer to the small claims for the cost of replacement.
Simon Johnson

 

[Barry98]

it shouldn't vent straight out onto the car park , the water could quite easily hit someone and cause damage etc . it should be 22mm too as you've been told already. id recommend getting it put right but a suitably qualified person

 

[SimonG]

Needs to be replaced as it will cause problems when any of the safety pressure / temperature devices blow off. The current pipe won't be able to cope and will back up flooding your property. LBC should have inspected this as part of their own inspections, unless the installer used a competent person scheme to register it.

The outside pipework should terminate no more than 4" from ground level and not be a danger.

Oh and welcome to the forum 🙂

 

[simjohnson]

Thanks for your help and advice. I wonder whether this was a cost cutting thing as you only realise the pipe decreases to 15mm when you lift the panels and boards. All apppears as should be in 22m when you look in the tank room. They converted 30 apartments probably all in the same way would that give them a significant saving on pipework ie 15mm instead of 22mm? I wonder? but thanks again.
Simon

 

[Barry98]

Probably was down to cost 30 flats in 15mm rather then 22 is a big difference in £

 

[mountainman]

Probably was down to cost 30 flats in 15mm rather then 22 is a big difference in £

Are you seriously suggesting that a developer would cut corners and endanger people just to save money???

 

[Barry98]

Are you seriously suggesting that a developer would cut corners and endanger people just to save money???

Not at all , I'm pretty sure all were originally fitted in 22 and all 30 tenants removed them for scrap and refitted the 15 mm

 

[mountainman]

Not at all , I'm pretty sure all were originally fitted in 22 and all 30 tenants removed them for scrap and refitted the 15 mm

Not unknown in Social Housing schemes, well done in reminding me 🙂

 

[frankjames]

Not at all , I'm pretty sure all were originally fitted in 22 and all 30 tenants removed them for scrap and refitted the 15 mm

Haha, imagine the chaos ,grannies aat the scrap yard !

 

[tamz]

Are you on a commission for van insurance ^^

 

[Barry98]

What gives you that idea tamz?

 

[tamz]

Not sure, just a hunch

 

[AWheating]

i thought you needed to pay to advertise a company on the forum?? wheres the money? ill pm my account and sort code shortly 🙂

 

[AWheating]

HI
I bought a converted apartment in a mill block 5 years ago. I have an unvented boiler (electric). After a recent problem my plumber identified that the pipework from the tundish to the outside vent is the wrong size reduces from 22m to 15 mm pipe which runs for about 4 and a half metres before venting through the exterior wall as an open pipe (vents to the car park 25 foot below). Local building control have told me the pipework should be 22mm and that those were the regs at the time of the conversion. The developer who sold me the property says I should have discovered it in the 1st two years and won't help. The 15 mm pipework was not visible before I had the leak and only became apparent after I removed paneling to ensure the area of the leak dried out. Is the pipework as fitted likely to be a danger or cause more problems. Any views would be helpful as I'm debating whether to take the developer to the small claims for the cost of replacement.
Simon Johnson

the pipework is whats know as a Latent Defect........." a latent defect is a fault in the property that could not have been discovered by a reasonably thorough inspection before the sale."

the design and original installation was not to the regulations so is not a wear and tear fault, if you speak to your house warrantee company (nhbc,zurich etc....) and tell them its a latent defect as well as a design defect and should be retified free of charge.

 

[simjohnson]

I'll try them again using your explanation. They have given me a 'knock back' once already (premier).

 

[AWheating]

Google latent defect, you should get some information. My old company would have to repair/fix anything that was out of warrantee if it was deemed a latent defect...... anything designed or installed incorrectly free of charge. This was normal for our jobs for national house builders, local builders etc.......

at the end of the day the original installer did a dangerous installation and should not only be responsible for the correction of it but also be reported to building control and the hse.

 

[simjohnson]

thanks again for your help.
Simon

 

[billybob150811]

not fit for purpose is another phrase d2 is a size larger than d1 but different lengths require still larger pipes and if it joins with other discharges it needs to be further enlarged and you cant discharge water released from t&pr at a position where someone could be injured by it tell the builder that and threaten to get very expensive if they think a massive and i do mean really massive bill will concentrate their greedy mind

 

[simjohnson]

Having real difficulty with the builder developer. They are saying as it's outside the two year minor defect guarantee they won't cover it and that I should have found out before still I'll keep plugging away at them. Thanks for your help.

 

[mountainman]

Have you approached Building Control for their opinion yet as they had to sign the properties off.

Perhaps a solicitors letter initially and then the small claims court.
The argument that you should have noticed the defect earlier is irrelevant as you, as as lay-person, could not be expected to be conversant with Part G of the building regulations.
MM

 

[simjohnson]

Building control agree that it's wrong and have given me a copy of the regs in force at the time of the conversion to reinforce this. I've passed this to the developer as well as the e mail from building control stating they don't always inspect every aspect but really in part on builders to police themselves. I think it will have to be as you suggest Sols letter and small claims court. Thanks for your continued help.
Simon

 

[billybob150811]

hi simjohnson your quite right the builder does say its outside the two year minor defect period and i could tell you i am young and beautiful (its true but not relevent) this isnt a minor defect it is as a wheatly says a latent defect it doesnt has a time limit they knew it was wrong when they put it in and now is the time to put it right as they no there is a problem if water at 95 degree showered on you tomorrow they no all about the problem and they would have no defence for your million pound compensation claim and other people may be injured too include me on the list of people who need huge sums of money to get over the trauma

 

[AWheating]

hint hint 🙂

 

[simjohnson]

Developer hasn't replied since I mentioned what you told me to namely Latent Defect will keep you informed of developments.

 

[mountainman]

Make sure that all the other affected properties get on to him, that should spoil his summer. Lol

 

[Masood]

Having real difficulty with the builder developer. They are saying as it's outside the two year minor defect guarantee they won't cover it and that I should have found out before still I'll keep plugging away at them. Thanks for your help.

First, this is not a minor defect, it's in contravention of Building Regs, which have legal force. Secondly, as already stated, as a lay parson you can't be expected to spot the flawed installation, especially as it was boxed in.

 

[SimonG]

Also sounds as though BC are trying to pass the book as well. Expecting builders to police themselves is a bit of 'oh crap we didn't notice that'.

Good example, mate of mine went to service an oil boiler, it had recently been moved as part of an extension. He gave the cust an invoice and noted on it that no external remote acting fire valve had been fitted. Took a load of grief off of the woman about trying to get extra work etc, building control had passed all the extension. He left saying please yourself, I've noted it, if your house burns down good luck with the insurance claim. That week a building control officer phoned him and asked him to go back and fit the fire valve and send the bill to the bc.


So yes the developer has screwed up, but so has bc. But it's the developer who's going to have to pay for it.

 

[simjohnson]

Hi this was the last I had from the developer, just thought I would share it.
Mr Johnson,

I had instructed Gina not to reply to your earlier e-mail as we have made our position clear and are not willing to engage in any further dialogue with you about the matter

For the last time this is a non-essential minor defect brought to our attention well outside the minor defect period and unfortunately, although you do not like it, if you want the ‘blow-off’ pipe upsizing (although this is entirely unnecessary) you will now need to stand the cost of it yourself. There is no breach of contract as you suggest as the property was signed off for Building Regulation compliance and backed up with a 2 year Minor Defect Policy (& 10 year Major Structural) at the time of purchase to insure against any such irregularities. The fact that you have ‘missed the boat’ so to speak because presumably you did not get the boiler serviced in the first two years (?) (when presumably the defect would have been identified?) and then bring it to our attention or simply identify it in that time period when we would have returned to your property to put right does not represent a breach of contract

I would repeat my advice earlier that if you are intent on getting the ‘blow-off’ pipe upsized then you would be best spending your money employing a plumber rather than wasting it on legal action that will be ineffective.

For the record, we are not a member of a trade association

Regards

Tim Thomson
Technical/Construction Director

Britannia Developments Ltd
Lawns House
Lawns Lane
Farnley
Leeds
West Yorkshire
LS12 5ET

 

[SimonG]

I'm afraid Timmy's shot himself in the foot.
He's obviously not that technical if he's writing letters with regard d2 pipework and not knowing the regs.
It's not a minor defect, there are potentially serious consequences. Print out a copy of the G3 regs and send them a letter stating clearly that their installation breaches these regulations and you want the issue rectifying within xx days. Failing that you will pursue a course of action to remedy these issues and Britannia will be liable for all costs involved. cc the local building control.

 

[Howsie]

How funny! I hate arrogant developers with a passion.

Let's all phone up Timmy and tell him he's completely wrong.

 

[peteheat]

Hi,

I agree with all previous posts, it appears the developer has no true understanding of what the pipe is for, he also ignores the fact that the safety valve on pressurised cylinders are supposed to be tested at least once a year not just to ensure the pipe is clear but to ensure the safety valve is working properly.

I doubt you or any of your neighbours would appreciate getting a shower when going to your car because some plumber was not only following the regulations but doing what makes sense in testing the valve, that is why all such pipes are supposed to piped to a safe point of discharge.

The developers letter appears to be very confident maybe he is getting advice from the plumber who installed the system/

One thing we can all be sure of is that if the example given by billybob150811 was put to the test somebody would be paying a substantial amount in compensation and legal costs.

If what billybob150811 posted happened today who would be liable?

Believe it or not simjohnson person in charge of the property is now aware that there is a clear danger to others coming from their property, it could be argued that as he / she was aware of the potential danger and / or possible loss through damage to their own apartment failed to have the hazard rectified and by continuing to use a dangerous appliance has assumed full responsibility for the consequences.

I believe any good Solicitor would advise you to have the problem rectified and then take the necessary action to get the developer to reimburse your costs (and of course the Solicitors).

There a lot of apartments built where the builder / developer is no longer in business, that does not mean any bad or dangerous work should not be rectified, for example if it was a gas leak the property owner either pays to get it fixed or the gas supply is terminated.

It really is that simple, the O.P. is now aware of possible danger to others or loss to themselves (by flooding) they have a duty of care to others and their own insurers to correct the pipework A.S.A.P. establishing who is at fault is a job for later.

 

[Masood]

It really is that simple, the O.P. is now aware of possible danger to others or loss to themselves (by flooding) they have a duty of care to others and their own insurers to correct the pipework A.S.A.P. establishing who is at fault is a job for later.

Spot on. Now that you are aware of the issue, simjohnson, you need to have it rectified, or, should the worst happen and someone is scalded by discharge, you will share the burden of responsibility.

I wouldn't allow the developer to fob you off, though, as the defective installation is neither minor nor trivial, it is in direct contravention of Building Regs which carry the full force of the law.

The fact that Local Authority Building Control signed the work off is irrelevant. They do not as a matter of routine check the work of people on Competent Persons Schemes. That is the purpose of these schemes, to allow people who have proved their competence through things like Gas Safe registration, or having an Unvented (G3) qualification, to certify their own work. The installer either had the qualification and failed to comply with Regs, in which case he's liable, or he didn't inform LABC that the installer wasn't G3 certified and thus needed signoff. Either way, the developer is liable.

There is some merit in what he says, though - unvented cylinders should be seviced annually, as should boilers. Had this been done, the fault may have been spotted sooner. In any case, it doesn't absolve him of responsibility. As has been mentioned earlier, the description "latent defects" covers this sort of scenario, where faulty installations are hidden and only become apparent later when they give rise to problems.

I'd suggest asking the Local Authority Building Control to come and inspect the work. Despite it being signed off, they will take action for non-compliance. The HSE may also be interested in this type of installation due the potential for serious injury.

However, legal action will be expensive, drawn-out and stressful. You pays yer money and takes yer choices. Good luck!

 

[simjohnson]

Hi
Thanks for all your posts very helpfull in all cases and gives me a bit more confidence in going to small claims court. Am abroad at the moment and as soon as I return will have the work carried out. Hadn't had the boiler serviced in the first years as we have only used it about 10 weeks each year and shut it down each time we leave. Thanks again what I really need to do is get our management company doing more as I think the developers plumbed all 30 flats the same. I can see 15mm pipes exiting the outer walls of other apartments around the Mill. Will keep you updated. Would there be any problem with sharing your advise and opinions with the Mill management company.
Simon

 

[Barry98]

Hi
Thanks for all your posts very helpfull in all cases and gives me a bit more confidence in going to small claims court. Am abroad at the moment and as soon as I return will have the work carried out. Hadn't had the boiler serviced in the first years as we have only used it about 10 weeks each year and shut it down each time we leave. Thanks again what I really need to do is get our management company doing more as I think the developers plumbed all 30 flats the same. I can see 15mm pipes exiting the outer walls of other apartments around the Mill. Will keep you updated. Would there be any problem with sharing your advise and opinions with the Mill management company.
Simon

Thanks for keeping us posted Simon , good luck

 

[SimonG]

Share away Simon. Seen similar last year, non conforming d2 pipework in a series of flats. Did a report for cust to give to management company, never heard a peep after that.