Clive Summerfield )
Date: 2005-02-01 06:10:08 PST

"http://tinyurl.com/7y8y4" wrote in message
...

"Al Reynolds" wrote in message
...

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
A colleague bought a house on a new estate (from new) 2 years and 8
months ago. The main water tank is leaking, and needs replacement
(quoted price 350 quid). The builder says he won't replace it as it's
outside some '2 year period'.

That will be correct.

He says he's been told that NHBC doesn't cover this (I guess it's
structure only?), but what are opinions of him getting this paid for
(eventually) by the builder?

Very little chance.

I doubt the actual tank is leaking. Far more
likely to be one of the connections to the tank.
I bet the plumber who quoted for replacement
will be able to find one that looks *identical*.

snip

I would assess using a heat bank/thermal store that can be pulled through
the hatch, eliminating a cold tank, giving instant hot water, high prerssure
showers and liberating an airing cupboard. It is easy to fit as all the
pipes are in the airing cupboard. This will bring the system uop to date.
Cold tanks in lofts is yesterdays technology

Another option is replace the existing boiler with a high flowrate combi,
assuming an easy change and it fits in the same cupboard.


Another classic Adam/John Curtis/IMM/Dr Evil response. The house is
less
than three years old and yet you rekon a good solution to the original
poster's problem is to replace the tank with a heat bank in the loft,
or
replace the existing boiler with a combi. Madness, utter madness!

The problem is unlikely to be a tank failure, but rather a problem
with the
installation. If the builder is being awkward, then I'd first get as
much
evidence as possible, then either DIY or pay someone to fix it. Then
take
the builder through the small claims route at court to reclaim the
costs.

Cheers
Clive

If this man is to pay £350 to fix a cold tank and then pay about £500
for a good power shower pump, fitted, then he would be better off
modernising his system with a thermal store. That is £850 in all. He
has all to gain and little, except a little extra cost, to lose.
Having a cold tank in the loft in a new house, is a builder with no
idea of current water systems.

"timegoesby" wrote in message
om...
Clive Summerfield )
Date: 2005-02-01 06:10:08 PST

"http://tinyurl.com/7y8y4" wrote in message
...

"Al Reynolds" wrote in message
...

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
A colleague bought a house on a new estate (from new) 2 years and 8
months ago. The main water tank is leaking, and needs replacement
(quoted price 350 quid). The builder says he won't replace it as
it's
outside some '2 year period'.

That will be correct.

He says he's been told that NHBC doesn't cover this (I guess it's
structure only?), but what are opinions of him getting this paid
for
(eventually) by the builder?

Very little chance.

I doubt the actual tank is leaking. Far more
likely to be one of the connections to the tank.
I bet the plumber who quoted for replacement
will be able to find one that looks *identical*.

snip

I would assess using a heat bank/thermal store that can be pulled
through
the hatch, eliminating a cold tank, giving instant hot water, high
prerssure
showers and liberating an airing cupboard. It is easy to fit as all the
pipes are in the airing cupboard. This will bring the system uop to
date.
Cold tanks in lofts is yesterdays technology

Another option is replace the existing boiler with a high flowrate
combi,
assuming an easy change and it fits in the same cupboard.


Another classic Adam/John Curtis/IMM/Dr Evil response. The house is
less
than three years old and yet you rekon a good solution to the original
poster's problem is to replace the tank with a heat bank in the loft,
or
replace the existing boiler with a combi. Madness, utter madness!

The problem is unlikely to be a tank failure, but rather a problem
with the
installation. If the builder is being awkward, then I'd first get as
much
evidence as possible, then either DIY or pay someone to fix it. Then
take
the builder through the small claims route at court to reclaim the
costs.

Cheers
Clive

If this man is to pay £350 to fix a cold tank and then pay about £500
for a good power shower pump, fitted, then he would be better off
modernising his system with a thermal store. That is £850 in all. He
has all to gain and little, except a little extra cost, to lose.
Having a cold tank in the loft in a new house, is a builder with no
idea of current water systems.

Why is he going to pay £500 for a good shower pump? May already have one.
And why should he have to pay £350 for a cold tank that should have lasted
longer? The bottom line is that he shouldn't have to pay a penny to return
to the status quo, yet instead of helping him with his problem IMM/Dr Evil,
and now yourself, seem determined to have him spend money on so-called
"improvements" to his existing system. Yet apart from the fact that the
house is less than three years old, that his cold tank is leaking in some
unspecified manner and thus he doesn't have a mains pressure hot water
system, you, I and all the other posters who have responded have not the
faintest idea of the actual circumstances. So to claim that solving his
original problem is going to cost £850 is more than a little disingeneous.
Compare the cost of your proposal against the cost the original poster to
restore the status quo (i.e. £0 in all probability, albeit at an initial
cost of some money to fix the tank which he should recover, if he even needs
to pay it out in the first place).

Cheers
Clive

"Clive Summerfield" wrote in message
k...

"timegoesby" wrote in message
om...
Clive Summerfield )
Date: 2005-02-01 06:10:08 PST

"http://tinyurl.com/7y8y4" wrote in message
...

"Al Reynolds" wrote in message
...

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
A colleague bought a house on a new estate (from new) 2 years and
8
months ago. The main water tank is leaking, and needs
replacement
(quoted price 350 quid). The builder says he won't replace it as
it's
outside some '2 year period'.

That will be correct.

He says he's been told that NHBC doesn't cover this (I guess
it's
structure only?), but what are opinions of him getting this paid
for
(eventually) by the builder?

Very little chance.

I doubt the actual tank is leaking. Far more
likely to be one of the connections to the tank.
I bet the plumber who quoted for replacement
will be able to find one that looks *identical*.

snip

I would assess using a heat bank/thermal store that can be pulled
through
the hatch, eliminating a cold tank, giving instant hot water, high
prerssure
showers and liberating an airing cupboard. It is easy to fit as all
the
pipes are in the airing cupboard. This will bring the system uop to
date.
Cold tanks in lofts is yesterdays technology

Another option is replace the existing boiler with a high flowrate
combi,
assuming an easy change and it fits in the same cupboard.


Another classic Adam/John Curtis/IMM/Dr Evil response. The house is
less
than three years old and yet you rekon a good solution to the original
poster's problem is to replace the tank with a heat bank in the loft,
or
replace the existing boiler with a combi. Madness, utter madness!

The problem is unlikely to be a tank failure, but rather a problem
with the
installation. If the builder is being awkward, then I'd first get as
much
evidence as possible, then either DIY or pay someone to fix it. Then
take
the builder through the small claims route at court to reclaim the
costs.

Cheers
Clive

If this man is to pay £350 to fix a cold tank and then pay about £500
for a good power shower pump, fitted, then he would be better off
modernising his system with a thermal store. That is £850 in all. He
has all to gain and little, except a little extra cost, to lose.
Having a cold tank in the loft in a new house, is a builder with no
idea of current water systems.

Why is he going to pay £500 for a good shower pump? May already have one.
And why should he have to pay £350 for a cold tank that should have lasted
longer? The bottom line is that he shouldn't have to pay a penny to return
to the status quo, yet instead of helping him with his problem IMM/Dr
Evil,
and now yourself, seem determined to have him spend money on so-called
"improvements" to his existing system. Yet apart from the fact that the
house is less than three years old, that his cold tank is leaking in some
unspecified manner and thus he doesn't have a mains pressure hot water
system, you, I and all the other posters who have responded have not the
faintest idea of the actual circumstances. So to claim that solving his
original problem is going to cost £850 is more than a little disingeneous.
Compare the cost of your proposal against the cost the original poster to
restore the status quo (i.e. £0 in all probability, albeit at an initial
cost of some money to fix the tank which he should recover, if he even
needs
to pay it out in the first place).

Hang on. He said the house was guaranteed for 2 years. It is now three
years. Hard luck he has to pay £350 to stop the leak, and be no further on.

If this man has no power shower pump, which most new builds do not have,
then to get a decent shower using a £250 Stuart Turner pump, plus fittings
and labour, it is going to be over £500, more like £600-700. Alumber will
be tghere all kring doing it. Then the electrical side of it too. A
thermal store solves the two prime points of tank, and lack of decent
shower, and liberating an aring cupboard. What if he has two showers? He
will need two pumps, or a lot more money for very large pump, which is a lot
more extra cost.

The cheapest way out with all the benefits which have been outlined (full
mains pressure to all taps and showers and no silly pumps in the house), is
a new heat bank or thermal store in the loft. Replacing the tank and
putting a power shower pump in, is the pits.

You have to learn to look at the "big picture", not "oh the tanks is broke
fix it".

"top gear" wrote in message
...

"Clive Summerfield" wrote in message
k...

"timegoesby" wrote in message
om...
Clive Summerfield )
Date: 2005-02-01 06:10:08 PST

"http://tinyurl.com/7y8y4" wrote in message
...

"Al Reynolds" wrote in message
...

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
A colleague bought a house on a new estate (from new) 2 years
and
8
months ago. The main water tank is leaking, and needs
replacement
(quoted price 350 quid). The builder says he won't replace it
as
it's
outside some '2 year period'.

That will be correct.

He says he's been told that NHBC doesn't cover this (I guess
it's
structure only?), but what are opinions of him getting this
paid
for
(eventually) by the builder?

Very little chance.

I doubt the actual tank is leaking. Far more
likely to be one of the connections to the tank.
I bet the plumber who quoted for replacement
will be able to find one that looks *identical*.

snip

I would assess using a heat bank/thermal store that can be pulled
through
the hatch, eliminating a cold tank, giving instant hot water,
high
prerssure
showers and liberating an airing cupboard. It is easy to fit as all
the
pipes are in the airing cupboard. This will bring the system uop
to
date.
Cold tanks in lofts is yesterdays technology

Another option is replace the existing boiler with a high flowrate
combi,
assuming an easy change and it fits in the same cupboard.


Another classic Adam/John Curtis/IMM/Dr Evil response. The house is
less
than three years old and yet you rekon a good solution to the
original
poster's problem is to replace the tank with a heat bank in the
loft,
or
replace the existing boiler with a combi. Madness, utter madness!

The problem is unlikely to be a tank failure, but rather a problem
with the
installation. If the builder is being awkward, then I'd first get as
much
evidence as possible, then either DIY or pay someone to fix it. Then
take
the builder through the small claims route at court to reclaim the
costs.

Cheers
Clive

If this man is to pay £350 to fix a cold tank and then pay about £500
for a good power shower pump, fitted, then he would be better off
modernising his system with a thermal store. That is £850 in all. He
has all to gain and little, except a little extra cost, to lose.
Having a cold tank in the loft in a new house, is a builder with no
idea of current water systems.

Why is he going to pay £500 for a good shower pump? May already have
one.
And why should he have to pay £350 for a cold tank that should have
lasted
longer? The bottom line is that he shouldn't have to pay a penny to
return
to the status quo, yet instead of helping him with his problem IMM/Dr
Evil,
and now yourself, seem determined to have him spend money on so-called
"improvements" to his existing system. Yet apart from the fact that the
house is less than three years old, that his cold tank is leaking in
some
unspecified manner and thus he doesn't have a mains pressure hot water
system, you, I and all the other posters who have responded have not the
faintest idea of the actual circumstances. So to claim that solving his
original problem is going to cost £850 is more than a little
disingeneous.
Compare the cost of your proposal against the cost the original poster
to
restore the status quo (i.e. £0 in all probability, albeit at an initial
cost of some money to fix the tank which he should recover, if he even
needs
to pay it out in the first place).

Hang on. He said the house was guaranteed for 2 years. It is now three
years. Hard luck he has to pay £350 to stop the leak, and be no further
on.


It is actually the builder that states that the NHBC guarantee on the tank
was for two years. However, the workmanship should be guaranteed for up to
10 years under NHBC, the tank itself shouldn't have failed after only 3
years. Bottom line is that there are a number of options he can follow to
get this repaired without incurring further costs.

snip


You have to learn to look at the "big picture", not "oh the tanks is broke
fix it".

No one apart from the original poster knows the "big picture", not even you.
For all you know, he may already have high quality shower pumps fitted. Or
not. Stop making major assumptions based on inadequate information. Had the
original poster come here and asked for advice on upgrading his hot water
system, giving us a detailed breakdown of the current equipment installed,
his requirements, the size of the house, number of occupants, etc, then it
becomes possible to give meaningful advice based on that information. But
the giant leap from "The cold water tank in my three year old house is
leaking, the builder wants nothing to do with it and I've had a quote of
£350 to fix it. What should I do?" to "Change your hot water system to a
mains pressure solution." is the sort of leap made by people with either too
much money, a tendency to jumping to conclusions, or a fixation on their
"ideal" solution as being applicable to everyone. The real world isn't like
that.

Cheers
Clive

"Clive Summerfield" wrote:
It is actually the builder that states that the NHBC guarantee on the tank
was for two years. However, the workmanship should be guaranteed for up to
10 years under NHBC, the tank itself shouldn't have failed after only 3
years. Bottom line is that there are a number of options he can follow to
get this repaired without incurring further costs.

I suspect the workmanship on the tank installation is not
guaranteed for up to 10 years on the NHBC warranty.

The 10 year part of the NHBC warranty only warrants that the
house was built to building regs - *nothing* else. If this covers
the workmanship on installing a water tank, I'd be surprised.
The OP's friend *might* have got somewhere with the NHBC
warranty during the first two years, where slightly more is
covered and the builder is responsible for rectifying faults (rather
than insurance). Since the two years is up, that's irrelevant.

Bottom line is, there's no point in the OP's friend trying to
claim on the NHBC warranty, but as you say, there are a
number of other options open to them.

I would say the question comes down to: If the OP's friend
had had a water tank fitted three years ago and it had started
leaking, would they have any recourse? I would say they
ought to have some, as you might reasonably expect said
water tank installation to exist fault-free for at least five or
six years. I would suggest that trading standards would be
useful people to contact, but be wary that they might try to
fob the OP's friend off by saying it's an NHBC warranty
issue (which it almost certainly isn't).

Al

PS One of the only positive points about electrical work
coming under building control in the form of Part P is that
the electrical installation will now be covered by the ten
year part of the NHBC warranty, unless NHBC find some
cleer way of weaseling out of it.

"top gear" wrote in message
...


SNIP


You have to learn to look at the "big picture", not "oh the tanks is broke
fix it".


Theres a dimm phrase - another identity goes into the killfile

"Al Reynolds" wrote
| "Clive Summerfield" wrote:
| It is actually the builder that states that the NHBC guarantee on
| the tank was for two years. However, the workmanship should
| be guaranteed for up to 10 years under NHBC,
| The 10 year part of the NHBC warranty only warrants that the
| house was built to building regs - *nothing* else.

AIUI the 10 year NHBC warranty is for the *structure* of the house only, not
minor / snagging works. I don't think it even guarantees compliance with
building regs.

| I would say the question comes down to: If the OP's friend
| had had a water tank fitted three years ago and it had started
| leaking, would they have any recourse? I would say they
| ought to have some, as you might reasonably expect said
| water tank installation to exist fault-free for at least five or
| six years.

Having a water tank fitted separately would fall under consumer protection
legislation (Sale of Goods Act etc). However house purchase does *not* come
under this legislation.

Owain

"Owain" wrote in message
. ..
"Al Reynolds" wrote
| "Clive Summerfield" wrote:
| It is actually the builder that states that the NHBC guarantee on
| the tank was for two years. However, the workmanship should
| be guaranteed for up to 10 years under NHBC,
| The 10 year part of the NHBC warranty only warrants that the
| house was built to building regs - *nothing* else.

AIUI the 10 year NHBC warranty is for the *structure* of the house only,
not
minor / snagging works. I don't think it even guarantees compliance with
building regs.

| I would say the question comes down to: If the OP's friend
| had had a water tank fitted three years ago and it had started
| leaking, would they have any recourse? I would say they
| ought to have some, as you might reasonably expect said
| water tank installation to exist fault-free for at least five or
| six years.

Having a water tank fitted separately would fall under consumer protection
legislation (Sale of Goods Act etc). However house purchase does *not*
come
under this legislation.

What does it come under?


_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

"Doctor Evil" wrote
| Having a water tank fitted separately would fall under consumer
| protection legislation (Sale of Goods Act etc). However house
| purchase does *not* come under this legislation.
| What does it come under?

Caveat emptor and tough bleeding luck.

Owain

"Owain" wrote in message
. ..
"Al Reynolds" wrote
| "Clive Summerfield" wrote:
| It is actually the builder that states that the NHBC guarantee on
| the tank was for two years. However, the workmanship should
| be guaranteed for up to 10 years under NHBC,
| The 10 year part of the NHBC warranty only warrants that the
| house was built to building regs - *nothing* else.

AIUI the 10 year NHBC warranty is for the *structure* of the house only,
not
minor / snagging works. I don't think it even guarantees compliance with
building regs.

The 10 year part warrants that the house was built to
the "NHBC Requirements" which are just the current
building regs. Note that the rather impressive "NHBC
Standards" are not covered by the warranty at all,
which is a shame because houses built to these standards
would be very well built indeed. The difference between
these two things (Standards and Requirements) is
deliberately obfuscated by the NHBC to give the
impression that the warranty means the house will have
been built to the NHBC standards.

This doesn't mean that the warranty is worthless; you
only get one year to pursue a building control office if
they have passed something which hasn't followed regs,
whereas you could potentially claim for up to 10 years
on the NHBC scheme. Another point worth noting,
however, is that there is an excess on any major claims;
the princely sum of £1000, which makes you wonder
why you would need anything other than plain old
buildings insurance ... except I suppose that if the fault
was existing when you purchased the house then the
insurance company might be less than happy about
paying out? I don't know about this...

Al

"Al Reynolds" wrote
| ... you could potentially claim for up to 10 years
| on the NHBC scheme. ... I suppose that if the fault
| was existing when you purchased the house then the
| insurance company might be less than happy about
| paying out?

That's the main reason for NHBC -- it's difficult to get a mortgage and
insurance cover unless the house is covered by such a policy. Other policies
are available for non-NHBC builders and self-builders.

Obviously a building control officer's sign-off doesn't give sufficient
reassurance :-)

Owain

In article , Owain wrote:
That's the main reason for NHBC -- it's difficult to get a
mortgage and insurance cover unless the house is covered by such
a policy. Other policies are available for non-NHBC builders and
self-builders.

Obviously a building control officer's sign-off doesn't give
sufficient reassurance :-)

In lots of cases NHBC *is* Building Control. NHBC and its
predecessor (name forgotten) go back to before WW2 when building
societies first started to require new houses to be covered. It's
not a question of the BCO's competency, rather what happens if
something bad happens - subsidence in particular - since it was
only in the 1970's that the courts decided you could sue a LA for
the negligence of their BCO.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser
http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm