At Risk vs Immediately Dangerous

[MNW67]

A few years ago a BG engineer "condemned" my dad's boiler for a tiny crack in one of the burners, and said it would have to be disconnected. Another BG engineer turned up the next day to cut off the gas supply to the boiler. Dad said he wanted this second engineer to take a look at the crack because he didn't believe it was really a problem. In the end the second engineer agreed to do this, and decided that the original engineer has been overzealous and that the boiler could still be used. But before he agreed to re-examine the burner, Dad had quite a row with him, during which the engineer said that if he wasn't allowed to disconnect it he would call the emergency service who would come and disconnect the gas supply to the property.

I have only just seen the original notice from the first engineer who did the condemning. I'm trying to understand the terminology. He has ticked the box which says "At Risk" rather than "Immediately Dangerous" He has also written "AR" which I assume means "At Risk" . The boiler is due for another safety check soon and I'd like to get up to speed beforehand. Did BG follow the correct procedure here? My layman's reading of this notice is what they did wasn't right, and they should just have attached a warning label.

 

[gas112]

tells you what at risk /immediately dangerous is in here . Section 6

https://www.gassaferegister.co.uk/media/0kopaiik/igem-g-11-ed-2-with-amendments-july-2022-and-june-2024.pdf

 

[mattylad]

As it was "years ago" does it really matter now?

 

[MNW67]

As it was "years ago" does it really matter now?

The boiler is having another safety inspection next month where they will examine the burner. We would just like to know the rules beforehand in case the same thing happens. Forewarned is forearmed!

 

[MNW67]

tells you what at risk /immediately dangerous is in here . Section 6

https://www.gassaferegister.co.uk/media/0kopaiik/igem-g-11-ed-2-with-amendments-july-2022-and-june-2024.pdf

Thanks, reading that has actually been very helpful.

I was also hoping to get an explanation of the correct procedure from an expert

 

[helplessowner]

We've had 3 of those.
We agree the notices themselves are vague, so we always make sure to ask for an explanation of WHY it is a risk.
Some risks are risker than other risks.
(1) Last property, Vaillant Tech diagnosed low gas supply (explained that one gas appliance could interrupt another), switched off the gas at the meter and phoned Transco (as they were then) Middle of winter - brrr. Fortunately Transco arrived pretty quickly (faulty gas regulator at the meter).
(2)This property - during our Baxi saga, one Tech found it not burning properly and turned boiler off completely (gas and power) until Baxi could return to fit a new part. We lived with a big yellow notice (no hot water/heating) for a week until sorted.
(3) Also this property, last Baxi Tech gave an at risk because of a missing bracket on the flue (been like it for 10 years...) Turned off the power but not the gas, explained that regulations meant the missing bracket on a vertical flue "could" allow it to be dislodged in high winds. We allowed him to get off the drive before we turned the boiler back on (the flue is anyway going to be replaced along with the boiler soon).

 

[danfre]

So you had a immediately dangerous or a at risk notice years ago but not thought to get it fixed

 

[dilalio]

Ultimately, it's down to the last person in and what they decree.

Would you rather be here to argue the toss or not?

 

[dilalio]

We've had 3 of those.
We agree the notices themselves are vague, so we always make sure to ask for an explanation of WHY it is a risk.
Some risks are risker than other risks.
(1) Last property, Vaillant Tech diagnosed low gas supply (explained that one gas appliance could interrupt another), switched off the gas at the meter and phoned Transco (as they were then) Middle of winter - brrr. Fortunately Transco arrived pretty quickly (faulty gas regulator at the meter).
(2)This property - during our Baxi saga, one Tech found it not burning properly and turned boiler off completely (gas and power) until Baxi could return to fit a new part. We lived with a big yellow notice (no hot water/heating) for a week until sorted.
(3) Also this property, last Baxi Tech gave an at risk because of a missing bracket on the flue (been like it for 10 years...) Turned off the power but not the gas, explained that regulations meant the missing bracket on a vertical flue "could" allow it to be dislodged in high winds. We allowed him to get off the drive before we turned the boiler back on (the flue is anyway going to be replaced along with the boiler soon).

Unsafe situations.

What would you do if faced with such in your line of work?

We don't make the rules - we abide by them to remain "competent", "registered" and be able to continue making our living and sleep at night!

 

[MNW67]

So you had a immediately dangerous or a at risk notice years ago but not thought to get it fixed

I forgot half the story! Basically, it can't be fixed. Dad had a BG contract for many, many years. BG first found the crack in this burner about fifteen years ago, but a manager overruled the engineer and refused to replace it because the crack was "far too small". Fast forward a few years, and the over zealous engineer decides to condemn it, even though the crack is still exactly the same size. The second engineer couldn't even find it until Dad pointed out where it was. A magnifying glass is really needed to see it clearly. By that time, the parts were no longer available, so the first engineer wanted to condemn it. Maybe, with hindsight, Dad should have asked whether he could have paid for a new burner fifteen years ago. But he wasn't given that option and he wouldn't have realised the parts would become unavailable. Also, the BG contract cost him a fortune.

 

[gas112]

what make model
boiler is it on ?

 

[MNW67]

A Baxi FS 601 balanced flue.

A couple of places online still show the burner available, but when you ring they've not actually had it for years. We did a very thorough check everywhere when it was condemned.

 

[helplessowner]

Unsafe situations.

What would you do if faced with such in your line of work?

We don't make the rules - we abide by them to remain "competent", "registered" and be able to continue making our living and sleep at night!

Not sure what you are implying - my post was not a criticism of the Techs who issued the notices - I know perfectly well that if they see something that they consider to be a risk, or not to current regs, they are obliged (legally and morally) to issue a warning notice.
BUT - in some situations, the decision whether to issue a notice or just tell the home owner that something needs to be sorted does not always seem to be a fixed science, and the notices themselves can be very vague , nothing that really makes it clear to the home owner the degree of risk.

We have always found the Techs very willing to explain (in simple terms) the reason for the notice and how big a risk (and how immediate)they, with their knowledge, consider it to be. We have never had an argument with them about it.
So - our 3 cases:
item 1 -At risk. Yellow sticker, gas off at meter. Potential build up of gas and a subsequent explosion. We waited for Transco to come and sort the problem and turn the gas back on.
Illustrated to us just how important that annual service is - we were totally unaware that anything was wrong.

Item 2 -At risk. Yellow sticker, gas and power off at boiler. Improperly burning, could result in carbon monoxide poisoning. Boiler remained totally off until required part was replaced.
This was a follow-up for the same problem 4 days earlier - but the previous Tech had left the boiler on, simply saying that it was still not quite right.

Item 3 - Warning notice. Power off at boiler, gas left on. No yellow sticker. Not as per current regulations. Tech said had to report it as part of his job. This was described to us as a "potential future risk". It was pretty clear he assumed we would turn the power back on to the boiler once he had left.
6 previous visits over a 7 week period had either not noticed or commented on the missing bracket.

Having the degree of risk explained makes it considerably easier to accept not having hot water or heating until whatever causes the problem is remedied.

 

[MNW67]

Ultimately, it's down to the last person in and what they decree.

Would you rather be here to argue the toss or not?

Those are good points!

I was really only asking about the procedure. I wanted to know more about what "At Risk" meant. From the link I was given above, and from BG's own safety notice, I think I understand it now. This is only a very temporary situation whilst we decide what to do with this house.

 

[dilalio]

"'You' are the engineer on-site, it's down to your discretion"

Favourite Gas Safe 'go to', when their guidance is sought for "grey" areas.