[Poll] Rate my lagging

[Tardigrade]

Re-done previous post as I was unclear.

Scenario - multi-million pound council programme to redistribute heat from a hospital, via a set of "block" boilers, into homes with heat exchangers. My personal bill was 15k for the local work (x290 flats in block) and 4k (x a lot) for the longer distance hospital stuff. As a leaseholder, I pay. No breakdown. The standard of work generally was awful, and lots of remediation work was done. The latest thing I am fighting is the standard of lagging. For me, a system based on waste heat distribution is particularly sensitive to heat loss, so lagging seems important. We turn on the hot water tap and literally wait c. 2 minutes for hot water in some cases, as an example.

So the context is quite specific: the standard is: You, a reasonable and knowledgeable professional, have specified lagging work of a reasonable standard, knowing the use case is for a heat exchanger system.

Now, here is the lagging that was done:
Album — Postimage.org

None of the cuts have had adhesive applied. Significant gaps ont he side you can't see at the joints. As you can see, none of the clip areas, or valve areas, are covered. Good practice guidance is clear this is sub-standard:
http://www.armacell.com/C1256AF100412A28/F/NT016C8C66/$FILE/ArmaflexApplicationUK.pdf

Q&A!
Q. This isn't a place for contractor bashing, pay for a 3rd party opinion.
A: I have got a 3rd party opinion, and it is that the lagging isn't good enough. But that is just one opinion vs the council, I need more, and it isn't fair to get a ton of people turning up to give me an opinion. Also, I'm as much council-procurement bashing as contractor bashing.

Q: It depends how much you paid / what work was specified
A: There is no cost breakdown. The whole project cost a lot, so I think the standard should be high. The key thing for me is I understand a heat exchanger system is particularly sensitive to heat loss, and so a reasonable procurer should have specified a good standard of lagging. (For those interested, NO lagging was done originally...!)

 

[Welder]

Which bit of my post did you NOT understand?
Get a professional surveyor in!
Opinions mean NOTHING as no one has seen or can see the damn job. You need objectivity not a freaking Brexit shambles.

@ShaunCorbs shut this down please.

 

[Welder]

Your poll is nonsense. 🙄
You cannot require two opinions in one question 😡

 

[SimonG]

Just going to bang on until somebody tells them something they want to hear.

Typical of somebody with an axe to grind.

 

[Tardigrade]

Mate I don't know what has triggered you in to this aggression, calling me stupid etc. I've just tried the poll, and it only needs one, not two responses as you appear to be indicating. The responses available are also clearly on a spectrum, and I don't see how they might conflict, if that is the meaning of your barb.

 

[Tardigrade]

Yes I do have an axe to grind...why shouldn't I? Would you be happy to pay 19k for shoddy work? Why the hostility?

 

[SimonG]

Everybody just vote the top option 🙂

 

[Gasmk1]

in none of the posts were you called stupid, and you havent paid £19000 personally the council has paid so take issue with the council over the workmanship.

 

[SimonG]

It's gone up 4 grand since the original post.



Got bit on the right one this time.

 

[Tardigrade]

1. Yes I was called stupid, by a poster in this thread, in the other thread.
2. I clarified in this post how cost went from 15k to 19k
3. Yes I did pay, as I've said multiple times. You seem to have a problem with council tenants, which I am not.

Anything else constructive to add, or are you just an aggressive, unhelpful chap by nature?

 

[SimonG]

TBH i got sick of reading it after the first line.

 

[Tardigrade]

Than perhaps don't accuse me of things in an aggressive tone until you have? Or ask to maliciously derail my poll?

 

[SimonG]

1. Yes I was called stupid, by a poster in this thread, in the other thread.
2. I clarified in this post how cost went from 15k to 19k
3. Yes I did pay, as I've said multiple times. You seem to have a problem with council tenants, which I am not.

Anything else constructive to add, or are you just an aggressive, unhelpful chap by nature?

He didn't call you stupid, he said you lacked the intelligence.

Only one person being aggressive, yourself. It's very typical though of people who don't like the answer to their question.

 

[SimonG]

When was this work done. I asked on t'other post and still not answered.

 

[Tardigrade]

Ok. You're not aggressive. You're simply lacking in empathy, kindness, passivity, constructiveness and non-aggressiveness. That disingenuous enough for your standards?

I don't like people being dishonest, and not answering what I asked. That has happened repeatedly. Before the other chap kicked off, he said quite clearly the work wasn't good enough earlier in the other thread, for the use context. Most people that have provided reasoned answers have agreed the work isn't good, but simply qualified it that that is not uncommon. So it is nothing to do with not liking what I hear. In this case, it is to do with two people deciding they'll go hell for leather in ruining my post simply because they appear to be nasty pieces of work.

 

[SimonG]

Answer the question in post 14 or do I have to use smaller words?

 

[Tardigrade]

This specific lagging was done this week. This was re-doing lagging done a few months back, and the original unlagged major work was done a few years prior (it took a while for us to get the remediation work round 1 done).

 

[SimonG]

How many months is a 'few'. Shouldn't be hard to give specific dates.
What was in the original contract? For 19k I expect their was quite a bit of documentation.

 

[rpm]

I`M OUT!

 

[Tardigrade]

As I explained, the council ran procurement, and as such, there is near zero documentation provided to us, and we don't have access to what they contracted out. I am effectively challenging the council - so what they did or did not agree with the contractors is not relevant as much as what they SHOULD have agreed.