Search the forum,

Discuss Combi conversion, is it right? in the Plumbing Jobs | The Job-board area at PlumbersForums.net

Status
Not open for further replies.
Now now lads
all fine with me shaun - can you smell the roast pork ? we could start a plumbers and c/h engineers cooking program and go on CH 4 and be celebrities - I love Mary Berry
 
all fine with me shaun - can you smell the roast pork ? we could start a plumbers and c/h engineers cooking program and go on CH 4 and be celebrities - I love Mary Berry

I can just about to put ours in :D
 
i missed that but brilliant
I think that my involement in this thread is over BUT IMHO
accountants always count my money and my lawyers always look after my ex wifes BUT people like US actually make,fix,design and install real things that keep people warm - NEVER LOSE SIGHT OF THIS WHEN YOU DO YOUR vocation - I love this business since 1979
 

There is a bit about hot water should arrive at the taps in 30 seconds on page 18 of this [https://www.wras.co.uk/downloads/pu...sessment_of_plumbing_in_private_premises.pdf/] document which refers back to the law you have quoted above. Note, however, that G18.4 is a guidance note and, as such, probably does not mean very much. Also, contained in that note is a suggestion that combi boilers will probably not be able to comply with this.

Let's say a customer asks me to fit a low water consumption tap in a bathroom and this pushes the time for the water to arrive hot from 20 seconds to 32. Is the plumber now required to spend a day to re-route the pipework to bring the time down to a reasonable one?

Take your point entirely about 3 feet, but sometimes that's how it is. As I've said before, without having been at your house, I cannot possibly say if the installer made the best of the situation or not, and that really is all any of us can say.

Working to a decent standard in the eyes of the law is one thing, but I always take the attitude that if my intervention leaves the house no less compliant than it was before I acted, then I have done my job.

It is very easy to sit in Whitehall and say how things should be done, but realistically, if I come across a cold water storage cistern that needs a replacement float operated valve washer, I do not insist on an entire new cistern installation because the existing one was installed in breach of the Water Supply (Water Fittings) Regulations 1999; all I do is advise, otherwise my customers will be on here complaining that I forced them to have un-necessary work done. Given that the regulations are not retrospective, as those in Whitehall are not entirely stupid, I am not convinced that a judge would find against me.

Quite honestly, I appreciate you had a pressing need to have the work done and so went for the first quote, but that would not suddenly make you gullible enough to believe the fitting was 'free'. If the ASA wants to make a prosecution for false advertising, that is one thing, but I cannot seriously believe you were misled by the offer of free fitting.

The impression I get is you weren't happy with the work. Quite possibly it was a sloppy job and you will win a court case. Let us know how it goes.
 
There is a bit about hot water should arrive at the taps in 30 seconds on page 18 of this [https://www.wras.co.uk/downloads/pu...sessment_of_plumbing_in_private_premises.pdf/] document which refers back to the law you have quoted above. Note, however, that G18.4 is a guidance note and, as such, probably does not mean very much. Also, contained in that note is a suggestion that combi boilers will probably not be able to comply with this.

Let's say a customer asks me to fit a low water consumption tap in a bathroom and this pushes the time for the water to arrive hot from 20 seconds to 32. Is the plumber now required to spend a day to re-route the pipework to bring the time down to a reasonable one?

Take your point entirely about 3 feet, but sometimes that's how it is. As I've said before, without having been at your house, I cannot possibly say if the installer made the best of the situation or not, and that really is all any of us can say.

Working to a decent standard in the eyes of the law is one thing, but I always take the attitude that if my intervention leaves the house no less compliant than it was before I acted, then I have done my job.

It is very easy to sit in Whitehall and say how things should be done, but realistically, if I come across a cold water storage cistern that needs a replacement float operated valve washer, I do not insist on an entire new cistern installation because the existing one was installed in breach of the Water Supply (Water Fittings) Regulations 1999; all I do is advise, otherwise my customers will be on here complaining that I forced them to have un-necessary work done. Given that the regulations are not retrospective, as those in Whitehall are not entirely stupid, I am not convinced that a judge would find against me.

Quite honestly, I appreciate you had a pressing need to have the work done and so went for the first quote, but that would not suddenly make you gullible enough to believe the fitting was 'free'. If the ASA wants to make a prosecution for false advertising, that is one thing, but I cannot seriously believe you were misled by the offer of free fitting.

The impression I get is you weren't happy with the work. Quite possibly it was a sloppy job and you will win a court case. Let us know how it goes.

Thanks for the reference. Like you say, It is a guideline, this is likely to be more prescriptive for a large firm than it is on the small business. As for being that gullible, first of all, making claims like that is now prohibited so whether I was that gullible isn't strictly that important in terms of complaining about it, additionally, they have now stopped doing it, which indicates that they know they shouldn't have been doing it. However on a personal level, when you are having surgery and are worried you might not come back from it and it's cold outside and all you want is the house warm for your family can you really imagine that you'd be looking into it too much?

Thanks for the advice ,

Jeff
 
Last edited:
I haven't read the whole thread but I'd send the firm one or two official letters asking them to rectify the work and why. Assuming they refuse have the work done and then sue them for the cost of rectification. Give the law a clear and definable way to make a judgement on your case rather than the vagueries of an advertising claim that they know longer use. In the end this is an issue of standards rather than false advertising which is subjective, your system works and you agreed on the price, secondly a conversion pack could mean anything including all the sundries used for the installation. If you're not happy with the work, giving them a chance to rectify it is the normal and first course of action despite the time that has passed.
 
I haven't read the whole thread but I'd send the firm one or two official letters asking them to rectify the work and why. Assuming they refuse have the work done and then sue them for the cost of rectification. Give the law a clear and definable way to make a judgement on your case rather than the vagueries of an advertising claim that they know longer use. In the end this is an issue of standards rather than false advertising which is subjective, your system works and you agreed on the price, secondly a conversion pack could mean anything including all the sundries used for the installation. If you're not happy with the work, giving them a chance to rectify it is the normal and first course of action despite the time that has passed.

I've written them a letter and will report back.

Thanks for the advice.
 
I've written them a letter and will report back.

Thanks for the advice.

Reporting back. I made it clear in my letter that i wasn't happy, referenced the regs and the water rules i was told about and said i felt the claims of free fitting were unlawful and misleading and that the work was not of a good enough quality.

They immediately replied by post claiming everything was upto standard and denying that they'd offered free fitting.

In spite of saying my claims had no merit they immediately offered me 28% of the purchase price refunded into my bank. They then paid that money within an hour of my accepting it. This is very odd behaviour.

I've never experienced anyone deny the merits of a complaint and then offer a large sum of cash, so I was very confused. I took the cash, as frankly it was more than fair.

I do wish to point out that this was a very large firm with a bad reputation on this forum and amongst gas engineers in general and that this wasn't some poor bloke working hard on his own.

Thanks for all the advice.
 
@mrtibbs, or should I call you Terry? Talk to me! This post is 4 pages long and we still do not have an answer to
Post 2? @ShaunCorbs (Or have I missed it) what make of Boiler do you have? I’m going to say a Worcester Bosch and I am also going to say that the company drive blue VW Vans. However they do not do free fitting! They do free boilers with labour only. I am betting the gave you 28% to stop you being an absolute pain in the backside (no offence intended).
 
@mrtibbs, or should I call you Terry? Talk to me! This post is 4 pages long and we still do not have an answer to
Post 2? @ShaunCorbs (Or have I missed it) what make of Boiler do you have? I’m going to say a Worcester Bosch and I am also going to say that the company drive blue VW Vans. However they do not do free fitting! They do free boilers with labour only. I am betting the gave you 28% to stop you being an absolute pain in the backside (no offence intended).

Thanks for the gratuitously offensive reply. The vans were not blue and I have a screenshot of their adwords campaign and a video where they clearly offered free fitting. The boiler is a WB though.
 
It was supposed to be a joke mate. Sorry for any offence caused. I’ll take 1 out of 3 though:p:p
 
they offered a conversion pack this could be construed as anything, it could just be an extra bundle of pipe and a fittings bag. containg an array of elbows and sockets and tees
 
I would suggest they will have any number of loopholes to hide behind. I’m not necessarily saying theyve done anything wrong but some larger companies can’t be bothered with the hassle when people stamp their feet
 
that'l be a big company with a penguin

Ahh, no not them.

they offered a conversion pack this could be construed as anything, it could just be an extra bundle of pipe and a fittings bag. containg an array of elbows and sockets and tees

In theory it could, but in a contract between a business and consumer the vagueness and the lack of a relationship between the price and the value is prohibited under the 2008 Consumer protection from unfair trading regulations. These sort of rules catch companies run by sales types out quite easily as hardly anybody knows the law exists and in relative terms it is quite new. It's an odd law and even contains a term making it illegal to encourage children to pester their parents, which has really hurt toy adverts for example.
 
I would suggest they will have any number of loopholes to hide behind. I’m not necessarily saying theyve done anything wrong but some larger companies can’t be bothered with the hassle when people stamp their feet

In terms of the quality of the work etc, i'd say that whether they've done something wrong is arguable, it isn't black and white at all in this case, and they could just have settled to shut me up as like you say that's what big companies do all the time. In regards to the false claim of free fitting, however, that is a completely prohibited practice and anyone in a compliance role would know that.
 
To be honest poorly worded advert or not the OP has been very very lucky to get any sort of compensation a year down the line. The OP can argue that their advert is misleading but in the real world we all know that nothing is free and you can guarantee that they will have legal people that will have gone all over the advert to make sure That it is watertight. If there is anything that I have learned from the legal system in the last two years its that a good solicitor can argue that black is white and often win. As previously commented above I think any of us would always recommend the customer gets three quotes and take the middle one. In this instance the OP has to make a quick decision which is often the case. that Doesn’t automatically put the company in the wrong, likewise it doesn’t put the customer in the wrong either. Communication in this game is absolutely paramount and having read the whole thread I would say neither party are really in the wrong. The company large print may be misleading but I would be positive that their small print will elaborate, caveat or explain. I guess the final question is why would the OP signup to such a “misleading“ quote when they clearly have an understanding of advertising legality?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rpm
Glad you have received something back and thank you for updating us
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Reply to Combi conversion, is it right? in the Plumbing Jobs | The Job-board area at PlumbersForums.net

Creating content since 2001. Untold Media.

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock