Fred wrote:
"Lobster" wrote in message
...

tonyjeffs wrote:

Well my buildings insurance excludes "systems... which have not been
installed or fitted by a suitably-qualified workman" so according to that,
the "competency" issue is not relevant to the claim. I imagine


Since when are qualifications necessary? Suitably qualified means just
that!

That's semantics, but I think if you found yourself in a court of law
suing an insurance company who were refusing to pay out, I don't fancy
your chances if you tried to claim that you, a self-proclaimed
"competent" d-i-y'er, was the same thing as what the insurance company
define as a "suitable-qualified workman"?

David