Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Is British Gas trying it on?
My mate's central heating system needs to be flushed to get rid of a
build-up of sludge. British Gas came round and told him that although his boiler is working fine, it is a bit on the old side and it might be badly damaged when the system is flushed so it would make sense for him to buy a new boiler. (If he buys the new boiler they will flush his system for free, if he doesn't, it will cost £400 PLUS the cost of a new boiler if it breaks during the operation.) I guess my question is - is he being conned or is there a real chance of this happening? Cheers, JD |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Jo" wrote in message om... My mate's central heating system needs to be flushed to get rid of a build-up of sludge. British Gas came round and told him that although his boiler is working fine, it is a bit on the old side and it might be badly damaged when the system is flushed so it would make sense for him to buy a new boiler. (If he buys the new boiler they will flush his system for free, if he doesn't, it will cost £400 PLUS the cost of a new boiler if it breaks during the operation.) I guess my question is - is he being conned or is there a real chance of this happening? Cheers, JD Powerflushes must be as big a scam as damp proofing. I bet he doesn't need a new boiler or the flush either. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Jo
writes My mate's central heating system needs to be flushed to get rid of a build-up of sludge. British Gas came round and told him that although his boiler is working fine, it is a bit on the old side and it might be badly damaged when the system is flushed so it would make sense for him to buy a new boiler. (If he buys the new boiler they will flush his system for free, if he doesn't, it will cost £400 PLUS the cost of a new boiler if it breaks during the operation.) I guess my question is - is he being conned or is there a real chance of this happening? To answer this, ask yourself another question: do British Gas "engineers" get a commission of at least 5% when they con a customer into getting a new boiler? (Answer: yes, they do.) Or, to put it another way: would you *really* trust an outfit advertised by Ricky Tomlinson, an actor who is type-cast at playing somewhat shonky scousers? (NB: This does not imply -- and should not be taken to infer -- that no Liverpudlian is honest. I'm sure there's an honest scouser, somewhere.) -- Paul |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Jo" wrote in message
om... My mate's central heating system needs to be flushed to get rid of a build-up of sludge. British Gas came round and told him that although his boiler is working fine, it is a bit on the old side and it might be badly damaged when the system is flushed so it would make sense for him to buy a new boiler. (If he buys the new boiler they will flush his system for free, if he doesn't, it will cost £400 PLUS the cost of a new boiler if it breaks during the operation.) I guess my question is - is he being conned or is there a real chance of this happening? I didn't even need to open this posting to be able to give you the answer - "yes" David |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:30:47 +0100, "Paul C. Dickie"
wrote: Or, to put it another way: would you *really* trust an outfit advertised by Ricky Tomlinson, an actor who is type-cast at playing somewhat shonky scousers? I was doorstepped by BG lately. I took _great_ pleasure in explaining that I didn't trust their company, and the reason I didn't trust it was because of their use of a scouse fascist to advertise them. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 19:46:19 +0100, Andy Dingley
wrote: On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:30:47 +0100, "Paul C. Dickie" wrote: Or, to put it another way: would you *really* trust an outfit advertised by Ricky Tomlinson, an actor who is type-cast at playing somewhat shonky scousers? I was doorstepped by BG lately. I took _great_ pleasure in explaining that I didn't trust their company, and the reason I didn't trust it was because of their use of a scouse fascist to advertise them. and they said? ..andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 00:08:44 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote: and they said? Nothing at all of course. Big faceless corporate - the guy on my doorstep was just working from a script. Still, made me feel better, which is more than BG are usually good for. -- Smert' spamionam |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
In message , Paul C. Dickie
writes In article , Jo writes My mate's central heating system needs to be flushed to get rid of a build-up of sludge. British Gas came round and told him that although his boiler is working fine, it is a bit on the old side and it might be badly damaged when the system is flushed so it would make sense for him to buy a new boiler. (If he buys the new boiler they will flush his system for free, if he doesn't, it will cost £400 PLUS the cost of a new boiler if it breaks during the operation.) I guess my question is - is he being conned or is there a real chance of this happening? To answer this, ask yourself another question: do British Gas "engineers" get a commission of at least 5% when they con a customer into getting a new boiler? (Answer: yes, they do.) Or, to put it another way: would you *really* trust an outfit advertised by Ricky Tomlinson, an actor who is type-cast at playing somewhat shonky scousers? (NB: This does not imply -- and should not be taken to infer -- that no Liverpudlian is honest. I'm sure there's an honest scouser, somewhere.) You'd better ask Boris Johnson about that -- geoff |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
In message , Andy Dingley
writes On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:30:47 +0100, "Paul C. Dickie" wrote: Or, to put it another way: would you *really* trust an outfit advertised by Ricky Tomlinson, an actor who is type-cast at playing somewhat shonky scousers? I was doorstepped by BG lately. I took _great_ pleasure in explaining that I didn't trust their company, and the reason I didn't trust it was because of their use of a scouse fascist to advertise them. You should have invited them in and wasted a couple of hours being entertained ... and then said that -- geoff (who still hasn't got around to doing so) |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"tarquinlinbin" wrote in message ... On 15 Oct 2004 02:35:20 -0700, (Jo) wrote: My mate's central heating system needs to be flushed to get rid of a build-up of sludge. British Gas came round and told him that although his boiler is working fine, it is a bit on the old side and it might be badly damaged when the system is flushed so it would make sense for him to buy a new boiler. (If he buys the new boiler they will flush his system for free, if he doesn't, it will cost £400 PLUS the cost of a new boiler if it breaks during the operation.) I guess my question is - is he being conned or is there a real chance of this happening? Why doesnt he get a second opinion from another CORGI engineer/company? Sort of implies that BG staff have CORGI licences :-) Did they all actually bother to do so after privatisation ? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
In message , G&M
writes "tarquinlinbin" wrote in message .. . On 15 Oct 2004 02:35:20 -0700, (Jo) wrote: My mate's central heating system needs to be flushed to get rid of a build-up of sludge. British Gas came round and told him that although his boiler is working fine, it is a bit on the old side and it might be badly damaged when the system is flushed so it would make sense for him to buy a new boiler. (If he buys the new boiler they will flush his system for free, if he doesn't, it will cost £400 PLUS the cost of a new boiler if it breaks during the operation.) I guess my question is - is he being conned or is there a real chance of this happening? Why doesnt he get a second opinion from another CORGI engineer/company? Sort of implies that BG staff have CORGI licences :-) Did they all actually bother to do so after privatisation ? They did, but then realised how much it was costing, so they said (in a nutshell) we're not going to register our fitters anymore, what are you going to do about it? -- geoff |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"raden" wrote in message ... In message , G&M writes "tarquinlinbin" wrote in message .. . On 15 Oct 2004 02:35:20 -0700, (Jo) wrote: My mate's central heating system needs to be flushed to get rid of a build-up of sludge. British Gas came round and told him that although his boiler is working fine, it is a bit on the old side and it might be badly damaged when the system is flushed so it would make sense for him to buy a new boiler. (If he buys the new boiler they will flush his system for free, if he doesn't, it will cost £400 PLUS the cost of a new boiler if it breaks during the operation.) I guess my question is - is he being conned or is there a real chance of this happening? Why doesnt he get a second opinion from another CORGI engineer/company? Sort of implies that BG staff have CORGI licences :-) Did they all actually bother to do so after privatisation ? They did, but then realised how much it was costing, so they said (in a nutshell) we're not going to register our fitters anymore, what are you going to do about it? I don't blame them. To men who are C&G qualified and have been working in the industry, why should they pay for a certificate to prove what they already know. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:46:14 +0100, "IMM" wrote:
"raden" wrote in message They did, but then realised how much it was costing, so they said (in a nutshell) we're not going to register our fitters anymore, what are you going to do about it? I don't blame them. To men who are C&G qualified and have been working in the industry, why should they pay for a certificate to prove what they already know. At that level neither do I. However, if this is what is happening, then their employer is breaking the law if the employees are relying on his registration and don't have their own. I can't find anything in the GSIU regulations or HSE guidelines that exempts BG. At the least it gives them an unfair commercial advantage if they don't have to do the same as everybody else. ..andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 21:28:11 +0000, raden wrote:
In message , G&M writes "tarquinlinbin" wrote in message . .. On 15 Oct 2004 02:35:20 -0700, (Jo) wrote: My mate's central heating system needs to be flushed to get rid of a build-up of sludge. British Gas came round and told him that although his boiler is working fine, it is a bit on the old side and it might be badly damaged when the system is flushed so it would make sense for him to buy a new boiler. (If he buys the new boiler they will flush his system for free, if he doesn't, it will cost £400 PLUS the cost of a new boiler if it breaks during the operation.) I guess my question is - is he being conned or is there a real chance of this happening? Why doesnt he get a second opinion from another CORGI engineer/company? Sort of implies that BG staff have CORGI licences :-) Did they all actually bother to do so after privatisation ? They did, but then realised how much it was costing, so they said (in a nutshell) we're not going to register our fitters anymore, what are you going to do about it? I thought it was the Transco guys who weren't registered. Some jobsworth of a BG customer would soon have clocked the problem if BG fitters weren't registered? -- Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter. The FAQ for uk.diy is at www.diyfaq.org.uk Gas fitting FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFitting.html Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/SealedCH.html |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
In message , Andy Hall
writes On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:46:14 +0100, "IMM" wrote: "raden" wrote in message They did, but then realised how much it was costing, so they said (in a nutshell) we're not going to register our fitters anymore, what are you going to do about it? I don't blame them. To men who are C&G qualified and have been working in the industry, why should they pay for a certificate to prove what they already know. At that level neither do I. However, if this is what is happening, then their employer is breaking the law if the employees are relying on his registration and don't have their own. I can't find anything in the GSIU regulations or HSE guidelines that exempts BG. It's called a special dispensation not really difficult to obtain when you have someone else's dangly bits in a firm grip -- geoff |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Andy Hall" wrote in message news On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:46:14 +0100, "IMM" wrote: "raden" wrote in message They did, but then realised how much it was costing, so they said (in a nutshell) we're not going to register our fitters anymore, what are you going to do about it? I don't blame them. To men who are C&G qualified and have been working in the industry, why should they pay for a certificate to prove what they already know. At that level neither do I. However, if this is what is happening, then their employer is breaking the law if the employees are relying on his registration and don't have their own. I can't find anything in the GSIU regulations or HSE guidelines that exempts BG. At the least it gives them an unfair commercial advantage if they don't have to do the same as everybody else. Either Transco or BG, have minimum recruitment standards. They don't take on plumbers and the likes with a CORGI certificate, which heating companies would do. The old Gas Boards would not take on anyone with C&G, or the modern equiv. Many would only recruit people they had actually trained and were returning. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 10:23:07 +0100, "IMM" wrote:
"Andy Hall" wrote in message news On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:46:14 +0100, "IMM" wrote: "raden" wrote in message They did, but then realised how much it was costing, so they said (in a nutshell) we're not going to register our fitters anymore, what are you going to do about it? I don't blame them. To men who are C&G qualified and have been working in the industry, why should they pay for a certificate to prove what they already know. At that level neither do I. However, if this is what is happening, then their employer is breaking the law if the employees are relying on his registration and don't have their own. I can't find anything in the GSIU regulations or HSE guidelines that exempts BG. At the least it gives them an unfair commercial advantage if they don't have to do the same as everybody else. Either Transco or BG, have minimum recruitment standards. They don't take on plumbers and the likes with a CORGI certificate, which heating companies would do. The old Gas Boards would not take on anyone with C&G, or the modern equiv. Many would only recruit people they had actually trained and were returning. That's all fine, but my point was really about why they should be exempted from the law. It can be that BG have excellent training and supervision arrangements - they probably do - and that CORGI does not do a good job of supervision and manages by exception - i.e. acts when there are complaints. However, it is inconsistent if BG is effectively allowed to run their own self certifying arrangement while others are not. Either everybody should be self certifying (which was deemed not to be good enough, hence CORGI) or they should be regulated by an independent body. Having just one "independent" body like CORGI seems unsatisfactory as it is more like a trade association than an independent regulator - there should at least be more than one or a genuinely independent organisation. Equally, if BG is effectively operating a self certifying arrangement, where are the independent controls? They are not the "old gas board" any more but a commercial operation, and if they are self certifying there is a potential conflict of interest. ..andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Andy Hall" wrote in message ... On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 10:23:07 +0100, "IMM" wrote: "Andy Hall" wrote in message news On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:46:14 +0100, "IMM" wrote: "raden" wrote in message They did, but then realised how much it was costing, so they said (in a nutshell) we're not going to register our fitters anymore, what are you going to do about it? I don't blame them. To men who are C&G qualified and have been working in the industry, why should they pay for a certificate to prove what they already know. At that level neither do I. However, if this is what is happening, then their employer is breaking the law if the employees are relying on his registration and don't have their own. I can't find anything in the GSIU regulations or HSE guidelines that exempts BG. At the least it gives them an unfair commercial advantage if they don't have to do the same as everybody else. Either Transco or BG, have minimum recruitment standards. They don't take on plumbers and the likes with a CORGI certificate, which heating companies would do. The old Gas Boards would not take on anyone with C&G, or the modern equiv. Many would only recruit people they had actually trained and were returning. That's all fine, but my point was really about why they should be exempted from the law. They were there first. CORGI came about to get rid of cowboy operators. The old gas boards were not cowboy operators. The likes of BG/Transco has a monopoly, so they should specify a minimum training level, and quals, and that is it. Then CORGI gives a certificate to Transco/BG men. It is ludicrous that they should pay to sit a test if they leave. It can be that BG have excellent training and supervision arrangements - they probably do - and that CORGI does not do a good job of supervision and manages by exception - i.e. acts when there are complaints. BG/Transco have QA depts, so are monitoring quality. However, it is inconsistent if BG is effectively allowed to run their own self certifying arrangement while others are not. They can, it depends on how big they are. Either everybody should be self certifying (which was deemed not to be good enough, hence CORGI) or they should be regulated by an independent body. An independent body can monitor how self certification is being implemented in organisations. SElf certification may only be to organisations of a minimum size. Having just one "independent" body like CORGI seems unsatisfactory as it is more like a trade association than an independent regulator - there should at least be more than one or a genuinely independent organisation. Equally, if BG is effectively operating a self certifying arrangement, where are the independent controls? They are not the "old gas board" any more but a commercial operation, and if they are self certifying there is a potential conflict of interest. The system needs updating. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:24:37 +0100, "IMM" wrote:
The old Gas Boards would not take on anyone with C&G, or the modern equiv. Many would only recruit people they had actually trained and were returning. That's all fine, but my point was really about why they should be exempted from the law. They were there first. CORGI came about to get rid of cowboy operators. The old gas boards were not cowboy operators. Maybe, maybe not. Again there is the point even in the old system that there was not independent accountability. The likes of BG/Transco has a monopoly, so they should specify a minimum training level, and quals, and that is it. Then CORGI gives a certificate to Transco/BG men. It is ludicrous that they should pay to sit a test if they leave. Presumably this is why there are arrangements for employers to be registered and for operatives not to have their own registration. If the employer is investing in training they should have a way to protect that investment rather than just training for their competitors or for people to set up on their own without cost. It can be that BG have excellent training and supervision arrangements - they probably do - and that CORGI does not do a good job of supervision and manages by exception - i.e. acts when there are complaints. BG/Transco have QA depts, so are monitoring quality. Fine, but if they are still within the organisation, where are the independent checks and balances? I'm not suggesting that skulduggery goes on but the temptation and opprotunity is there. However, it is inconsistent if BG is effectively allowed to run their own self certifying arrangement while others are not. They can, it depends on how big they are. Other firms of heating engineers? Outside CORGI control? Either everybody should be self certifying (which was deemed not to be good enough, hence CORGI) or they should be regulated by an independent body. An independent body can monitor how self certification is being implemented in organisations. SElf certification may only be to organisations of a minimum size. Although size is not a predictor of quality, the model that is being done for other industries is fairer. Having just one "independent" body like CORGI seems unsatisfactory as it is more like a trade association than an independent regulator - there should at least be more than one or a genuinely independent organisation. Equally, if BG is effectively operating a self certifying arrangement, where are the independent controls? They are not the "old gas board" any more but a commercial operation, and if they are self certifying there is a potential conflict of interest. The system needs updating. That's true. ..andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"Andy Hall" wrote in message ... On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:24:37 +0100, "IMM" wrote: The old Gas Boards would not take on anyone with C&G, or the modern equiv. Many would only recruit people they had actually trained and were returning. That's all fine, but my point was really about why they should be exempted from the law. They were there first. CORGI came about to get rid of cowboy operators. The old gas boards were not cowboy operators. Maybe, maybe not. Maybe yes. that was the case. Initially to join CORGI, you only needed to provide a C&Q qualification. I think they even accepted plumbing C&G. It was voluntary. The boards had strict tarining and qualification levels. Again there is the point even in the old system that there was not independent accountability. That was so, but the safety level of the gas boards spoke for itself. CORGI was to eliminate cowboy idepenedet ooperatiors. In the klate 1960s/early 1970s there were many explosions, none down to the gas boards, so action was taken, and CORGI came about. The likes of BG/Transco has a monopoly, so they should specify a minimum training level, and quals, and that is it. Then CORGI gives a certificate to Transco/BG men. It is ludicrous that they should pay to sit a test if they leave. Presumably this is why there are arrangements for employers to be registered and for operatives not to have their own registration. If the employer is investing in training they should have a way to protect that investment rather than just training for their competitors or for people to set up on their own without cost. It can be that BG have excellent training and supervision arrangements - they probably do - and that CORGI does not do a good job of supervision and manages by exception - i.e. acts when there are complaints. BG/Transco have QA depts, so are monitoring quality. Fine, but if they are still within the organisation, where are the independent checks and balances? I'm not suggesting that skulduggery goes on but the temptation and opprotunity is there. In a privatised money grabbing world there is. However, it is inconsistent if BG is effectively allowed to run their own self certifying arrangement while others are not. They can, it depends on how big they are. Other firms of heating engineers? Outside CORGI control? Don't know of any, and none are that big. Either everybody should be self certifying (which was deemed not to be good enough, hence CORGI) or they should be regulated by an independent body. An independent body can monitor how self certification is being implemented in organisations. SElf certification may only be to organisations of a minimum size. Although size is not a predictor of quality, the model that is being done for other industries is fairer. Size means they will the resource. Having just one "independent" body like CORGI seems unsatisfactory as it is more like a trade association than an independent regulator - there should at least be more than one or a genuinely independent organisation. Equally, if BG is effectively operating a self certifying arrangement, where are the independent controls? They are not the "old gas board" any more but a commercial operation, and if they are self certifying there is a potential conflict of interest. The system needs updating. That's true. .andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:52:45 +0100, "IMM" wrote:
BG/Transco have QA depts, so are monitoring quality. Fine, but if they are still within the organisation, where are the independent checks and balances? I'm not suggesting that skulduggery goes on but the temptation and opprotunity is there. In a privatised money grabbing world there is. The temptation is there regardless. In the public sector it is lack of control and competition resulting in complacency and laziness. However, it is inconsistent if BG is effectively allowed to run their own self certifying arrangement while others are not. They can, it depends on how big they are. Other firms of heating engineers? Outside CORGI control? Don't know of any, and none are that big. I didn't think that the legislation and HSE implementation permitted other than one organisation - i.e. CORGI to act as "regulator". Either everybody should be self certifying (which was deemed not to be good enough, hence CORGI) or they should be regulated by an independent body. An independent body can monitor how self certification is being implemented in organisations. SElf certification may only be to organisations of a minimum size. Although size is not a predictor of quality, the model that is being done for other industries is fairer. Size means they will the resource. Although the various organisations involved in the Building Regulations Part P scam are of quite varying sizes. ..andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Andy Hall" wrote in message ... On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:52:45 +0100, "IMM" wrote: BG/Transco have QA depts, so are monitoring quality. Fine, but if they are still within the organisation, where are the independent checks and balances? I'm not suggesting that skulduggery goes on but the temptation and opprotunity is there. In a privatised money grabbing world there is. The temptation is there regardless. In the public sector it is lack of control and competition resulting in complacency and laziness. That is a silly comment to make. However, it is inconsistent if BG is effectively allowed to run their own self certifying arrangement while others are not. They can, it depends on how big they are. Other firms of heating engineers? Outside CORGI control? Don't know of any, and none are that big. I didn't think that the legislation and HSE implementation permitted other than one organisation - i.e. CORGI to act as "regulator". Either everybody should be self certifying (which was deemed not to be good enough, hence CORGI) or they should be regulated by an independent body. An independent body can monitor how self certification is being implemented in organisations. SElf certification may only be to organisations of a minimum size. Although size is not a predictor of quality, the model that is being done for other industries is fairer. Size means they will the resource. Although the various organisations involved in the Building Regulations Part P scam are of quite varying sizes. .andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:42:03 +0100, "IMM" wrote:
"Andy Hall" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:52:45 +0100, "IMM" wrote: BG/Transco have QA depts, so are monitoring quality. Fine, but if they are still within the organisation, where are the independent checks and balances? I'm not suggesting that skulduggery goes on but the temptation and opprotunity is there. In a privatised money grabbing world there is. The temptation is there regardless. In the public sector it is lack of control and competition resulting in complacency and laziness. That is a silly comment to make. Simply an observation of what can and does happen. The point is really about opportunity and motivation. You linked the terms "privatisation" and "money grabbing" together. That is silly. There is nothing wrong with a profit motive, provided that appropriate controls are in place. ..andy To email, substitute .nospam with .gl |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Dryer plug for our British treadmill??? | Electronics | |||
How the US is to make friends & influence tourists.. | Metalworking | |||
fused British mains plugs | Electronics Repair | |||
***kin British Gas! Rant | UK diy | |||
The British and shopping cart technology | Metalworking |