Flue picture problem

[Corgigrouch]

Ultimately a toss up between "I strongly recommend that the appliance is turned off as it is hazardous and could be dangerous" and " the appliance is dangerous and should be disconnected" As the landlord, are you happy to charge money for people to live there in either case? Tenants do dumb things and blocking off air vents is a pretty common trick for them to do, so even if you fit an air vent..How comfortable are you with that?

 

[Clouseau]

It's not realistic to expect a landlord to carry the can for the stupidity of tenants, a correctly fitted vent will have text to say it should not be covered.
A little bit of Darwinist natural selection ultimately helps the gene pool, if not the HSE statistics. In the developed world we put too much effort into protecting people from themselves, and it's not necessarily a good thing.

In answer to the question, yes you will need the ventilation problem remedied.
No one on here will be able to give you a definitive answer on the flue as it will be subjective to the judgement of the person on the day taking into account a number of factors, some that we know, and others we know we don't know at present, eg flue pull, terminal position, adjacent extraction, compartment, etc, etc.
Hopefully you will get someone experienced who will not AR it through lack of confidence of bearing the responsibilty of his/her judgement.
After all isn't that what we get the film star wages for lads?

 

[ollski]

Hopefully you will get someone experienced who will not AR it through lack of confidence of bearing the responsibilty of his/her judgement.
After all isn't that what we get the film star wages for lads?

It is AR though...exposed flexible liner, unapproved jointing (probably cracked fire cement), flue bend too early. Even without the vent issue multiple ncs has to be AR these days. Nothing ID from that picture though even with no ventilation.

 

[kirkgas]

i think everyone agrees they would recommend not to use it, but it does matter what to classify, if you classify AR you can label and turn off, if you say ID and don't get permission to isolate you need to contact supplier, the scenario described is only AR not ID, if someone tests it and it fails a spillage test then it will be ID.
i think i feel a Bamber apology is required ( only from him because he seems to be the only one who cannot discuss anything but has to try to impose an arrogant bullish attitude)

 

[Aquaheat]

OK i know i should leave it but i thought i would put my two cents in aswell!!

First off it seems that a few people have forgotten what NCS, AR, and ID mean. (not mentioning names)

NCS - the installation met previous regulations but does not now meet the current regulations in force but the installation is working safely.

AR - the installation does not meet current regulations in force and may present at danger to person on property in the future.

ID - the installation does not meet current regulations in force and poses an immediate danger to persons or property.


Now taking into account that the installation has:

less than 600mm vertical flue between appliance and the first bend - NCS

no purpose provided ventilation - NCS

incorrect use of flue material - NCS

In legal terms, provided that the appliance has passed all relevant safety checks (flue flow/ splillage etc), then the engineer would be within his rights to deem the installation as NCS but...........

taking into account the wording of what an AR situation is then the most sensible option is to classify the installation as AR as we all know that a setup of this nature will be highly vulnerable to the unknown factors eg flue inversion etc. It may well pass on the day but it could well pose a danger tomorrow.

NOTE TO HOMEOWNER: This appliance needs to be tested by an RGI ASAP!!! There are many other factors that we on here cannot see and assess (are there extracts in the room or interconnecting rooms/ ceiling fans/ is it a compartment.. the list goes on) but as you can tell, from just one picture, most engineers aren't too happy with the installation and have deemed it to pose a potential risk to either you or your tenants.

Rant over sorry if my wording is off on some points but its late!!

i think i feel a Bamber apology is required ( only from him because he seems to be the only one who cannot discuss anything but has to try to impose an arrogant bullish attitude)

I could not agree more!!!!

 

[Corgigrouch]

It's not realistic to expect a landlord to carry the can for the stupidity of tenants, a correctly fitted vent will have text to say it should not be covered.
A little bit of Darwinist natural selection ultimately helps the gene pool, if not the HSE statistics. In the developed world we put too much effort into protecting people from themselves, and it's not necessarily a good thing.

I cannot agree more, however there is one thing that overrides this belief for me and that is self preservation

 

[Clouseau]

jonjb
Since Aug 2005, no purpose provided ventilation has been AR.

Although NCS is not a technically correct description for some faults (eg installed wrongly) we do not have any other recognised category, so sometimes NCS becomes a catch all for faults not affecting safety.

 

[heatingman]

Gas Industry Unsafe Situations Procedure-8

Immediatly Dangerous (ID) appliances/Installations.

An "immediatly Dangerous" (ID) appliance/installation is one which,if operated or left connected to a gas supply, is an IMMEDIATE danger to life or property. Broadly speaking these will be instalations that fail gas tightness/soundness tests, appliances that fail spillage tests or appliances which have serious flueing and/or ventillation or combustion defects when measured against manufacturers instructions and/or BS 5440-1 and 2 or other relevant standards/guideance documents.

Quoted from essential gas safety manual

No ventilation---serious
Incorrect flue material-----serious
Insufficent vertical--------serious

plus what other defects !!

Its ID every time for me folks.

 

[heatingman]

Gas Industry Unsafe Situations Procedure-8

Immediatly Dangerous (ID) appliances/Installations.

An "immediatly Dangerous" (ID) appliance/installation is one which,if operated or left connected to a gas supply, is an IMMEDIATE danger to life or property. Broadly speaking these will be instalations that fail gas tightness/soundness tests, appliances that fail spillage tests or appliances which have serious flueing and/or ventillation or combustion defects when measured against manufacturers instructions and/or BS 5440-1 and 2 or other relevant standards/guideance documents.

Quoted from essential gas safety manual

No ventilation---serious
Incorrect flue material-----serious
Insufficent vertical--------serious

plus what other defects !!

Its ID every time for me folks.

 

[nickso]

Gas Industry Unsafe Situations Procedure-8

Immediatly Dangerous (ID) appliances/Installations.

An "immediatly Dangerous" (ID) appliance/installation is one which,if operated or left connected to a gas supply, is an IMMEDIATE danger to life or property.

but its not an immediate danger, is it? its not actually doing anything, it just has the potential to do it. the word "is" before the word "immediate" is the big clue here.

if there is a hole in the flue its ID
if it is spilling due to the flue/vent defects its ID

right now with the info we have its AR.[/b]

 

[petit_pablo]

What i find worrying is that there is such a difference of opinions in how this installation should be classified.

The way i see it, the installation is At Risk and i would leave it turned off with safety notice provided. I would also leave a quote for the remedial work required to bring it up to scratch.

 

[ollski]

No ventilation---serious = at risk
Incorrect flue material-----serious = at risk
Insufficent vertical--------serious = ncs

There seems to be an idea that a multiple at risk makes an ID in the same way a multiple ncs makes an AR...it doesn't.

 

[heatingman]

or appliances which have serious flueing and/or ventillation or combustion defects when measured against manufacturers instructions and/or BS 5440-1 and 2 or other relevant standards/guideance documents.

 

[superdupergasman]

No ventilation currently NCS but will soon be AR .... I would treat as AR anyway

Since when has no ventilation been NCS?? I have always been informed that its AR.

Flue NCS x 2 could cause another AR

but 2 x AR does not make it ID....there is no immediate danger unless its spilling as has been previously stated.

 

[ollski]

No ventilation currently NCS but will soon be AR .... I would treat as AR anyway

Since when has no ventilation been NCS?? I have always been informed that its AR.

None at all has always been AR, but if even 1% was provided it was ncs.