ffs

[Leo21]

What make boiler as not all need sealing, the collars do the job.
There is not a hope in *** of any poc's ever getting back in a building from a fan flue through a flue hole anyway, even in a direct gale force wind but there are dozens of ligit positions where it would happen.
Its all pish and we are forced to swallow it and deal it out.

My thoughts exactly. Some of these rules are bloody embarrassing.

 

[hammers4spanner]

My thoughts exactly. Some of these rules are bloody embarrassing.

This has caused more aggro than what its worth , why use the term 'at risk'

Why not follow the motor trade route and advise? Customers just don't understand the terms we have to use its a joke.

 

[buckley plumb]

Can you see from the outside at that distance that it's not sealed. As above I carry fire cement. You could try fire foam and try and fill from inside to out.

 

[hammers4spanner]

Just going to go back and wedge it full of cement , if the tenant had half a brain and never went into OMG IM GOING TO DIE mode then this would not have been an issue .

 

[firemant]

Communication.

Sealing a top floor flat is obviously an issue, but I can never understand an "engineer" not trying to sort a problem. In this case, seal the insie (easy), issue AR for the outer flue, but explain to tenant in VERY clear terms (sod hints) the actual risk. Turn off at isolation switch.

Having said that, if I was desperate enought to do the very cheap agents CP12's (which I am not, and don't), I may take the view that they are paying for a minimum service. But I would find it difficult to make the tenant suffer for the agents tightness.

 

[plumben]

If it was me I would of done the same, I might of attempted to ring the landlord and say I can sort it now for X amount but we all know what landlords are like,

 

[plumben]

Ohh and for top floor flats to seal the outside of the flue get one of them mortar guns
http://www.NoLinkingToThis/p/roughneck-brick-mortar-gun/67965
And a bit of tubing to poke through the wall

 

[GrahamM]

i read through the back of the sheets to double check protocol , from what i understood ID to seek permission to disconnect AR to just switch off

Just to clarify.
You MUST ask permission to turn off for an AR situation!

 

[hammers4spanner]

I f you read the print on the paperwork it says ID with disconnected your permission appliance will be disconnected.

AR the appliance is turned off nowhere on the paperwork does it say with your permission turn off on an AR

 

[hammers4spanner]

On the warning advice explains procedure and AR states turn off .

This AR imho needs to be changed its just so wishy washy

 

[newcastle phill]

I think if you refer to gsiup it states ask permission.
Page 10 latest edition

Either way you got it of

 

[Leo21]

On the warning advice explains procedure and AR states turn off .

This AR imho needs to be changed its just so wishy washy

It has been changed, it was in the mag a few months ago. NCS is verbal now.

 

[hammers4spanner]

I think if you refer to gsiup it states ask permission.
Page 10 latest edition

Either way you got it of

My warning notice pad maybe out of date lol doesn't say it like that on the back of the paperr work, however the wording of it on gsiup makes it even worse .

If you went down to a garage in a dodgy car they would say your cars carp wouldn't drive it but heres your keys .This AT RISK term needs to be re worded as every occasion i come across a AR scenario it leaves tenant or customer confused and some in panic mode.

 

[newcastle phill]

Ive ways thought its crazy. Id and at risk are bizarre.

Personally i would have only one "Serious risk" SR but with the lower AR threshold encompassing ID

And its cap off without peeing about.
None of this permission stuff.
And if they don't comply then supply off and fine [emoji1]

Its like some clever bum has had too much time on his hands at the inception if the gsiur and made it over complicated

 

[firemant]

I can't see why everyone gets worked up. ID is what it says: an IMMEDIATE danger. I have never had a punter refuse a cut off, when explained calmly and properly (and while I am at it, there is no need to start saying "you are lucky you weren't dead/blown up/poisoned etc). If they do refuse, explain you have to follow a process which will culminate in NG cutting off the supply to the house, followed by the cost pf reinstatement.

For AR, label and notice properly, and turn off at isolation switch. Explain the relevant seriousness of the particular situation and possible repercussions - and tell them how you have isolated. It is no big secret. Then it is up to them, and you are covered.
If it is dealt with professionally, you will probably get the followup work. If you want it.
Personally, I would be mightily ****ed off if my aged Aunt was left freezing over the weekend 'cos someone overstepped their remit.

 

[hammers4spanner]

I can't see why everyone gets worked up. ID is what it says: an IMMEDIATE danger. I have never had a punter refuse a cut off, when explained calmly and properly (and while I am at it, there is no need to start saying "you are lucky you weren't dead/blown up/poisoned etc). If they do refuse, explain you have to follow a process which will culminate in NG cutting off the supply to the house, followed by the cost pf reinstatement.

For AR, label and notice properly, and turn off at isolation switch. Explain the relevant seriousness of the particular situation and possible repercussions - and tell them how you have isolated. It is no big secret. Then it is up to them, and you are covered.
If it is dealt with professionally, you will probably get the followup work. If you want it.
Personally, I would be mightily ****ed off if my aged Aunt was left freezing over the weekend 'cos someone overstepped their remit.

Pretty much what I did if they decide to phone the HSE who tell them to leave it off then not my issue. Money 8n the bank and my home is nice and warm .....cheers

 

[newcastle phill]

Im not on about overstepping any remit - and i dont have a problem with an over complicated system that i operate within.

But i still think its over complicated.

If your grannys car failed an mot and it was 2 weeks before they got the part in the middle of winter would you be happy if she drove about for 2 weeks in a dangerous car to get her shopping.

I dont see your point as there are always alternatives when heating fails. I.e leccy heaters as temp measure.

Either pass or fail with advisories.
Boilers either safe or unsafe with advisories. Not well it could be at risk if a b or c happened. Its bollox

 

[firemant]

Fair enough, but how at risk is a boiler with an unsealed outer wall? There is a reference somewhere from GS that says they have found unnaceptable levels of POC's being blown back through an unsealed wall. I really can't see it. By definition, the POCs have already started to be diluted as soon as they leave the terminal, how on earth are they going to get back through a small gap in an 11" wall, after being blown by the fan away from the terminal, without being massively diluted?. Seal the inner wall, and it goes from bleedin' unlikely to downright impossible. IMO. But I wouldn't criticise anypine for following "the rules".

 

[newcastle phill]

I agree - fully. But regs are regs and its a joke turning it off with the same net result as capping it off.
In both instances it is against the law to use it so why let temptation get in the way so they can turn it back on as soon as your backs turned.

Imho they need one big list and one course of action - physical disconnect.
If gas safe are serious about safety - they need to get serious about safety.
At risk has to be the most pointless p.o.s ive ever heard

Anything else is just helpful advisory.