Can gas pipe develop crack on its own?

[matt1e]

Don't worry about their legal team, stick to your guns

Untitled

• lilystyle
• 17 Nov 2012
• 1

Look at the pic above, this is how you left it, yes?

Untitled

• lilystyle
• 17 Nov 2012
• 1

Now look at this picture, the outlet and pipe work is still attached and in situ but a small section of pipe has been taken out, looking at the breakdown of fittings you can safely assume that the soldered elbow has been unsweated and then the whole section has been pulled up and out of the fitting and then unscrewed out of the theaded joint in the wall, the pipe in the wall (the section that comes out of the leaking fitting) was not gripped or supported while this was getting unscrewed ( evident due to the fact that there is no damage to the wall in the capped off photo.

Likely scenario
The engineer, heated up the joint to unsweat it while gripping the section off pipe with a tool such as pipe grips or similar
The heat from his torch melted the solder in the joint but being in close proximity the heat traveled up the pipe also melted the solder in the joint in the wall. He then proceeded to lever the pipe up and out of the fitting and then carried on unscrewing the whole section out off the fitting in the wall and in doing so weakened the joint in question causing it to leak.
I'm sure most will agree

Matt

 

[Agile]

In the opinion of all the RGIs here, its most unlikely that any leak would have been made by knocking a PROPERLY made pipe.

Even so, we all consider that spending FIVE hours working there was totally excessive, even allowing for taking so many pictures ( evidence of someone who knew it would be questioned ? ) and most of us would have said about 1.25 to 1.5 hours with perhaps 2.0 hour for the slowest person.

Your weak point is this £100 payment because that may legally be discretionary rather than a "right". Its already stated to be dependent on THEIR assessment of the flat being left clean and tidy!

It would be pretty easy to challenge them in court over the bill and one of us close by MIGHT be prepared to go with you as a professional witness if you were close by. I would even present the case for you!

Its quite easy to present your own case in court but obviously you need to be vocal and able to think on your feet! People who live in social housing rarely are. There are a very few trainee barristers who will represent people free as part of their training but thats mostly in the large cities.

Of course if you are prepared to risk £60 court fee then they will probably step back and settle by paying you the £100 but as thats the only point of disagreement that could be risky because you dont know the legal status of that payment. If discretionary that its just that!

Of course the way to wrong foot them is to claim the £100 payment and then take them to court over the need for and the magnitude of the bill and I would expect you would win on both counts PROVIDING you could present the case and ideally have an RGI present or alternatively have one RGI prepare an expert witness statement.

Tony

 

[sooey]

5. Whilst at the property, the neighbour called at the door to report a smell through the party wall in the few days prior to our visit.

Why not have a word with this neighbour? Find out if he did actually knock on the door and speak to the engineer about a smell of gas. Or have you already done that?

 

[Dan Robinson]

I would argue on, however, from my recent legal fun and games (which I won) the best advice I got was to take the less is more approach.

You don't need to go into too much detail at the early stage. All it does if give them more ammunition to their arguments.

Also avoid speculation. Matt is possibly correct, but keep that for your own information. That kind of hypothesis is for a professional witness. Certainly at this stage.

What amazes me is how much consensus you have amongst the professionals here- a very rare thing indeed.

 

[lilystyle]

Thank you everyone,

I've been picking up on the wisdom of 'less is more' approach also (congrats Matt on winning your legal battle, btw)

Speaking to the neighbour would involve a major effort as we now live quite some distance away and don't have a car (plus our baby makes traveling about tricky), but it would be something we could do if it turned out to be crucial to our case

I wonder why the engineer took all the photos if they incriminate him? Maybe it was coz he was gambling on noone would ever actually examinie them? Like with him very long report that details how he took a completely unnecessary/impractical/unintelligent route to locating the leak - the report was enough to satisfy the HA that he'd done a thorough and necessary job. Ditto, I guess for the photos, maybe?

I think the £100 incentive is non discretionary so long as we meet all its criterior. We failed only because of the engineer's damning claims about the leak and its cause (us, according to him)

Thanks for your advice Tony. If it does go to small claims, do any of the RGIs here live in Plymouth? Trouble is with Plymouth is we're miles away from most of the rest of the country. Or would any of you be prepared to prepare an expert witness statement? We're now planning to go to CAB about this for advice

 

[CBF]

OP is that the highest resolution pic you have of the pipes laid out on the floor ? as if we could get it as big as you have we could look at the small piece of pipe of where the leak was to look at the solder.

I still stick to my orginal posts IMO there is no way by you removing your electric cooker could you have caused that leak, i also agree that the tightness test is being done incorrectly with his Anton

 

[CBF]

I'm only using a laptop but maybe someone with a bigger screen can see the date on that Anton, because certain things don't add up, the RGI's invoice says called out to a gas leak on the 31st, the HA says that the work was started on the 30th & completed on the 31st, the two vids are dated 30th, so which is it ? if the RGI wasn't called out till the 31st who did the vids the day before ? The orginal pics also state they were taken on the 31st

 

[Dan Robinson]

Anton says 30th, possibly after 5pm.

 

[lilystyle]

Interesting - have I missed it, or is there NO video/photographic evidence of him carrying out his longwinded tour of the house prior to 'correctly' locating the leak (in the most obvious palace to look)?

Did he in fact find the leak straight away on 30th August and record this with video and photos, then, without going back to the house at all, make up his detailed inventory for 31st so he could charge more money?

Shall have a go at scanning the photo again later after my baby's in asleep

 

[lilystyle]

And forgive me if I'm being ignorant, but is it standard/safe practice to leave a detected gas leak, that is so strong a neighbour reported smell it, leaking over night?

 

[CBF]

short & curlies i think the phrase is, how can you take two vids on one day, then say you have been "called out" to a gas leak the following day & take pics of something that was orginally there the previous day ? ie the solid wall without being dug out, nothing adds up at all, does this guy have a time machine ?? or was it two diff guys & the first one caused the leak ?

you could have a field day in court with this

 

[Dan Robinson]

As long as he left the meter turned off and disced it would be OK.

 

[Agile]

Thank you everyone,

I think the £100 incentive is non discretionary so long as we meet all its criterior. We failed only because of the engineer's damning claims about the leak and its cause (us, according to him)

I would not agree!

It all depends on the wording but I would doubt that its any contractual payment at all.

Much more likely to be a discretionary payment to those who leave the flat clean and tidy in "their judgement".

For those questioning the dates, it all seems quite clear that he went to do the vacating checks on the 30th and returned on the 31st leaving the gas off overnight.

Merely using the term "callout" means nothing more than he went there in gas man's language!

I wopuld be very surprised if they did not back off on receipt of a letter before action.

However, I still urge restraint over suing them for a discretionary payment. Unlike to win that in my view. Very likely to win if suing over a requirement to pay the invoice though.

They have used a clever tactic to reduce your liability to the point its hardly worthwhile you suing except on the principle.

But equally that favours you because equally it makes it less worthwhile them carrying the costs of defending your claim!

Tony

 

[CBF]

For those questioning the dates, it all seems quite clear that he went to do the vacating checks on the 30th and returned on the 31st leaving the gas off overnight.

Merely using the term "callout" means nothing more than he went there in gas man's language!

Tony look at the dates both on the vids & on the orginal low res pics, how can you dig a wall out, expose a leak, test it, photograph it, video it on the 30th then take pics of all the pipework & wall being intact the following day ?

If he has been so careful to take pics & video of everything then do you really think he is going to get something so wrong like the basic dates, i disagree with your gas mans language it clearly states he was called out on the 31st now wether he has put this to justfy his costs i don't know, if the neighbour smelt gas did they call national grid or the HA ? if it was the HA then they should have called NG & there would be a report of this.

plus for the OP to have caused this leak there would be damage done to the plaster around the FI/copper & as the pics clearly show there is no damage to that wall at all.

Any judge with any sense would throw the HA case straight out it is so full of holes it is laughable

 

[matt1e]

I would argue on, however, from my recent legal fun and games (which I won) the best advice I got was to take the less is more approach.

You don't need to go into too much detail at the early stage. All it does if give them more ammunition to their arguments.

Also avoid speculation. Matt is possibly correct, but keep that for your own information. That kind of hypothesis is for a professional witness. Certainly at this stage.

What amazes me is how much consensus you have amongst the professionals here- a very rare thing indeed.

good advice! and yes this is a rare thread Dan, not that often where these come up!