Back boiler in bedroom?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mrs Tara Plumbi said:
Even though Kirk is right we all want what Lame said to be right, don't we 🙂
Click to expand...

Pretty much. I hate AR why not have not to current standards and fail would make life alot easier.

I would do as Kirk says get all the paperwork signed turn off not cap and advise on the cp12 what needs to be done. Its then up to the landlord. The company I used to work with got investigated not for a death but a potential CO incedent I think it was a flue in a void no hatches no visual signs but a twin flue not sealed properley. Landlord refused CO detectors so it got put down as AR showed them the correct paperwork and that was the end of it. Dont know what happened to the landlord hope he got screwed.
 
lame plumber said:
AR or ID are you willing to 'put your name to something that doesnt come under common sense nowadays. It will soon pop up to ID status once a couple of bods dont wake up. Personally Id would tell the landlord it needs sorting now, and cap it, then if kirkie wants to pop down and reconnect, I'll forward a contact number. I wouldnt sleep in a room in that situation nowadays. But thats my personal opinion - and its my arse, especially if a jackdaw decides to take up residence in the chimney, which they do for a past time in my area, especially when the cowls get a bit old and dodgy and the seagulls whip them off. I have had to deal with 2 cases like this in recent years with blocked flues, so I wont accept it as an ncs or ar and after all every time you call gas safe , they tell you its the engineers descition on the spot dont they!

AR/ID the required result is to turn off the appliance, but one form allows the user to turn it back on!! So my attitude to prevent this is to cap and go, with an ID to support me. If they refused to turn it off for an AR then what, its you that gets the accusing finger if things go pearshaped and youd be guilty in some eyes so would you be happy to walk away? As it a landlord issue, then not doing anything isnt deemed acceptable either is it. So in my simple mind it needs capping based on dates given and sorting, may not be as per written regs, but gas safe wont support you either way imho and your the one there and the one who'll be blamed longterm.
Click to expand...
The rules/regs are there to be followed and wither you agree with them or not you should not be making up your own as you go along.
This is an AR situation at very most and to make it ID and cap off does not make you the better engineer. Especially if someone gets job after you and reconnects supply and leaves AR.

What next? Are you going to ID for having 85% of required combustion ventilation?

Follow the regs to best of your knowledge, if unsure seek assistance. Fully explain the situation to responsible person and get paperwork signed. Leave as the regs dictate.
You have done your job!
 
GrahamM said:
The rules/regs are there to be followed and wither you agree with them or not you should not be making up your own as you go along.
This is an AR situation at very most and to make it ID and cap off does not make you the better engineer. Especially if someone gets job after you and reconnects supply and leaves AR.

What next? Are you going to ID for having 85% of required combustion ventilation?

Follow the regs to best of your knowledge, if unsure seek assistance. Fully explain the situation to responsible person and get paperwork signed. Leave as the regs dictate.
You have done your job!
Click to expand...

whether or not you think Im wrong in this situation doesnt affect my decitions in this sort of situation, As gsr helpline will tell you, your there your decision, I would decide to cap it as there are too many variables ie landlord and tenants. If you wanted to come along and reconnect a setup like this then AR it, you would need your head examined as you would be setting up an unsafe situation, so think on on that one. We can all agree to disagree, in the end its your own assessment of the situation and you cant be faulted for being too safe only unsafe, so lets get realistic here and stop being prissy beggars and make sure we dont advice beople to set up an unsafe situation like you suggest! You know my feelings on this one so Im out of here now.
 
It's all very well saying that you will cap off an AR situation but the guidelines stipulate that it can only be done with the permission of the responsible person. You now need to explain to them why the back boiler that has been working fine for 20 years and still appears to be working fine is now immediately dangerous.

As long as you stick to the regs you are covered. Just make sure that you get people to sign everything and explain the possible consequences should they continue to use the appliance.

I'm all for gas safety but I need to make a living and getting a reputation as that bloke that keeps disconnecting stuff when it's not necessary doesn't help my cash flow.

People are in danger of putting their underpants on over their trousers and starring in the new super hero movie - Captain Over Zealous.
 
The real point is that you acknowledge the issue wether AR or ID and inform and address the issue with cust because i can tell you now the way this industry is at the moment i reckon a good percentage of gas engineers would not even recognise the issue and crack on and service it.

some of the stuff i'm seeing at the moment is horrific
 
Mike Jackson said:
It's all very well saying that you will cap off an AR situation but the guidelines stipulate that it can only be done with the permission of the responsible person. You now need to explain to them why the back boiler that has been working fine for 20 years and still appears to be working fine is now immediately dangerous.
.
Click to expand...


You have to explain why it's At Risk (of being a danger) to get permission to turn it off for A.R.

The phrase Immediately Dangerous doesn't need to come into the conversation as it's not appropriate.
 
snowhead said:
You have to explain why it's At Risk (of being a danger) to get permission to turn it off for A.R.

The phrase Immediately Dangerous doesn't need to come into the conversation as it's not appropriate.
Click to expand...

If immediately dangerous doesn't come into the conversation neither should capping off as it is not the appropriate action for an AR appliance. My point was that if you are saying it should be capped off you are implying that it is ID.
 
You don't need permission to turn it off under AR. You only turn it off at the customer control, or maybe the electrical isolation, apply the paperwork, and the client then decides whether to continue to use it.

You need permission to disconnect.
 
ID or AR it won't be used. Lets look at it on a legal position. Your standing in court in front of some smart arse barrister; he questions you on your actions in ID'ing the BBU in a bedroom, then throws the IUSSP in your face and says that you are not competent because the industry procedure says this is AR, so why did you say it was ID. Credibility undermined round 1 to the accused.
 
Reg Man said:
ID or AR it won't be used. Lets look at it on a legal position. Your standing in court in front of some smart arse barrister; he questions you on your actions in ID'ing the BBU in a bedroom, then throws the IUSSP in your face and says that you are not competent because the industry procedure says this is AR, so why did you say it was ID. Credibility undermined round 1 to the accused.
Click to expand...

Exactly my view point on this, if I comply with THEIR regs I cannot be held accountable or their system is at fault and that won't be allowed to happen.
Ok as mrs T says perhaps we want a reg change but until that happens I'm using their rules and won't be held as incompetent for choosing what regs I comply with and what regs I change to suit my opinion
 
firemant said:
You don't need permission to turn it off under AR. You only turn it off at the customer control, or maybe the electrical isolation, apply the paperwork, and the client then decides whether to continue to use it.

You need permission to disconnect.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about this statement?
 
Isn't there a silly rule that if someone is using the room as a bedroom due to serious illness (unable to go upstairs, etc...) that it's only NCS instead of AR as well? Or am I thinking of something else?
 
bewsh said:
Isn't there a silly rule that if someone is using the room as a bedroom due to serious illness (unable to go upstairs, etc...) that it's only NCS instead of AR as well? Or am I thinking of something else?
Click to expand...

in other words you saw one today in this scenario and put ncs
 
Bewsh, can't say I have heard of that. On the topic if a boiler was installed before 1996 in a bedroom it's NCS. If room has changed use post 1996, then it can have a cupboard built around it with adequate ventilation and a FSD fitted. However I believe this may just reduce the classification to NCS.

Regarding classification if a boiler is AR, unless the customer complains, it goes off, on the spur, with their permission. Fill out your paperwork and notify the customer not to turn it on until rectification work has been carried out. When an ID is issued, regardless of the customers feelings, the boiler is off and supply is cut and capped. When in that situation and the customer flatly refuses and gets aggressive, I would report the job and details to my company, fill out the paperwork and if self employed notify gas safe.

i don't believe you can over classify, you have to look after your own a### it's your job, your livelihood. I would rather ID a job, safe in the knowledge I can sleep well and the customer is also going to wake up in the morning.

So with that said I would still AR the baxi Bermuda. I know your friend did not change the use of the room, but as a landlord I would demand they change it back.
 
Just had a look in a corgi unsafe-sits book and it says that if the living room is temporarily used as a bedroom due to ill health then the open flued appliance may be classified as NCS, but with additional measures recommended, eg CO alarm.

And I agree, you won't get in trouble for over-classifying an unsafe situation, but you will be in trouble if you under-classify it and something happens. But that said, if the regs state it's AR and you've gone through the correct procedure then if something was to happen to someone in that room, you could not be blamed for it.
 
Exactly, it's all about looking after number one, that way the customers are looked after also.
 
Hampshiregas said:
Exactly, it's all about looking after number one, that way the customers are looked after also.
Click to expand...

I appreciate that you are looking out for number 1 but this is a no brainer really as its in black and white. Would you ar a cooker with no chain to look after yourself. would you ID a flue that is not clipped but in perfectly good order. No so why do that on this. You carry out your checks if it passes everything else visually inspect the termination of the flue to make sure it is still there so no little birdies can make a nice warm home in it. Then explain the issues with the tenant stating that the boiler is at risk due to blah blah then the landlord and say the same again and let him turn round to the tenant and say that they should not be sleeping in the lounge.

I have had this twice in the last couple of years always followed that and never had a sleepless night nor worried about it not even when somebody else went and turned it back on with out even noting it as I had the correct paper work all signed. If you want to be extra safe take a time stamped photo with the at risk sticker and paper work next to it just to prove you did all that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Featured Content

Back
Top