In article ,
Lobster wrote:
Recently had to have my dead boiler repaired. and was set to have the
main PCB replaced with a (self-sourced) reconditioned one rather than a
brand new one at an eye-watering price.

In the end the problem turned out to be something else; however my point
in posting is that the engineer tried to warn me off using the
reconditioned part because he says that he's heard of somebody having
had a house fire caused by one, followed by the resulting insurance
claim being turned down due to the boiler not having been properly
repaired by a standard manufacturer-supplied part.

Most 'reconditioned' PCBs are repaired originals. So the fire could just
as likely caused by poor initial design/manufacture of the PCB than any
repair.

A fire is plausible I suppose, but as to the last bit I smell bull****.
Could it be any way legit for an insurer to reject a claim on the above
basis (unless presumably they had highly specific and restrictive small
print in their policy wording?)

And just how would the insurer know a 'non maker part' had been fitted?

It's just a typical case of an unscrupulous 'engineer' spreading scare
stories to bump up his profits.

--
*Cleaned by Stevie Wonder, checked by David Blunkett*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.