Boiler servicing investigation expert: ‘I was stunned’

Thanks Patrick. I appreciate it is not within the remit of Which? to take direct action and that problems are always reported promptly to the relevant organisations.

The response from GSR looks like a typical response from an organisation when Which? uncovers a problem as a result of undercover investigation or otherwise.

If GSR informs the public – either on its website or via Which? – of large numbers of engineers being struck off the register or retrained and reassessed then I might be prepared to believe that they are taking appropriate measures. There is no comment about the Which? investigation on the GSR website and I rather doubt that will will learn of any action unless Which? keeps up the pressure.

Patrick, I’m assuming all 10 servicing engineers you used were gas safe registered, although the report does not say so. Did you check that they did not have bogus credentials?
If you had an accredited expert to inspect the work done and “We also exposed engineers making potentially dangerous mistakes.” would it not have been appropriate to have taken legal action against the companies that provided them?
The usual “we will investigate” (you’ve already done that) and “we take appropriate action to remedy this.” (what action?) are usually just brush-offs and it all gets forgotten
Perhaps when serious problems arise Which? should bare its teeth and take direct action.

Hi Ellie – personally, I think that this is an excellent starting point. Hopefully if ‘Which’ can keep the foot (albeit lightly maybe) on the pedal, standards can be pushed upwards.

I’m sure that most people can point out people in their own organisations who fall short of expectations, but when it comes to something like ‘gas safety’ it becomes more critical and important.

The report doesn’t state what type of boiler was serviced but does mention that it was tested by some with the cover off. There are occasions with the newer types of ‘High efficiency’ boilers that the main front cover is indeed off when carrying out certain tests and obtaining readings. Adjustments are then made to the gas valve with the front off. I am assuming that it was not one of these types of appliances, but I haven’t spotted it in your report.

I only mention this for clarity as I wouldn’t want a client to think I was doing something incorrect having read the Which report and not understood the difference between appliances.

All boilers should be serviced ‘according to the manufacturer’s instructions’, and this is the overriding criteria – I am sure that your expert would have been working on this basis.

Also similarly and quite worryingly, there is a gas engineer who has posted in the past that the PCB – printed circuit board should be taken out and inspected at servicing times. I know of not one single manufacturer who would want you to do this, and indeed any I have spoken to have been amazed at this suggestion. (as have other registered installers). Scary stuff !

Keep up the good work.

John

John – I take your points about the lack of detail. What’s in the Which? report is fine for the general public but it would add a lot of credibility if those in the industry had access to a more detailed report.

I can guess why a service engineer might inspect a circuit board. This can show evidence components that are likely to fail in future even if they are working fine when inspected. I have seen numerous examples of overheated components and swollen capacitors in domestic equipment that is often built with price rather than reliability in mind. I have no experience with boilers but having often heard of PCBs being replaced, I presume there may be problems of this nature. Decent circuit boards should really last the life of the boiler. Back in the days when engineers did repairs of TVs and radios (rather than swapping failed circuit boards) it was common to look for developing problems and replace components with ones more suitable for the purpose. In fact, TV engineers were sometimes advised to replace under-rated components by manufacturers when working on particular sets.

Gas appliances seem to get all the attention because of the greater risks but oil boilers need more frequent inspection because an accumulation of soot is not uncommon. Here is some advice from a trade association: http://www.oftec.org/Media/Default/DocGalleries/OFTEC%20Homes%20Guides/OFTEC_HomeGuide_OilServicing_Pub48.pdf

All gas engineers have to be on the Gas Safe Register but I do not know of any equivalent organisation for engineers who work on oil boilers. Some engineers do both oil and gas.

It is not at all reassuring to have a Gas Safe scheme run by Capita. Readers of Private Eye will understand – no doubt many others. I don’t know what Capita know about gas appliances but I am always wary of organisations that take on and manage stuff in which they have no previous experience. I believe understanding the industry you are becoming more involved in is of great value – but perhaps I am just overcautious.

That was my immediate thought when I read that Capita were running the registration scheme. For them, it could just be an administrative exercise with a moronic computer programme relying on pro forma returns from people going through the motions. I look forward to further information on this. I am somewhat disappointed that HSE outsources this function without any apparent concern over the essential technical and safety performance elements. With around 15-20 million domestic gas boilers in the UK the demand for gas engineers has grown exponentially over the last three decades and maintaining the required competence while passing sufficient engineers to maintain all these boilers has probably been a challenge.

I discovered the involvement of Capita last time we were discussing gas boilers. Rather than investing money in Capita, why does HSE not spend the money on doing something more practical than portraying achievement. Perhaps Which? should be informing Capita that their recent undercover survey suggests serious shortcomings in boiler servicing.

Trusted Traders does have spot checks (undercover investigators) when I asked the question.
I haven’t seen the Sept Mag yet, just the online article, and have asked whether Which? checked the service engineers’ credentials.

I sympathise with Darren Ward’s (heating engineer) comments above that Which? tend to condemn an industry rather easily. We don’t know how the engineers were chosen, whether they were actually qualified, what kind of companies they came from and how representative they are of the industry. If they are typical (but a much larger sample would be needed) then there is need of a radical look at training, examination and accreditation. This would just be a beginning.

Watchdog would quite happily expose people who do rubbish, dangerous. or extortionately priced work (“rip offs”). Why, if Which? are confident that these engineers were dangerous (and, by implication, their employers) do they not name and shame them?

Malcolm – One possible reason why Which? has not ‘named and shamed’ is that the engineer monitored may be unsatisfactory even if others working for the same company were first rate. It’s a sample number of one per company and even the finest organisation can have a few poor staff. I would want to see more evidence before condemning a company.

This is an important report but not, I think, one of Which’s best efforts. At the start it says: “Find out which firms failed to meet the legal requirements and how to protect yourself from poor work” Only the five large organisations whose engineers were monitored are mentioned. Maybe it had been the original intention to name and shame them all, large and small. I’m just guessing.

I have thought long and hard about how Which? should tackle investigations. You and I would be much happier with larger sample sizes in this and other reports, but that would mean that Which? would not be able to devote resources to other important issues. I can fully understand their approach of informing authorities and companies of problems and giving them the opportunity to respond. My main concern, as I said above, is that Which? members often don’t learn what has been achieved as a result of a Which? investigation such as the one we are discussing.

I agree that Which? should make more in depth and therefore significant (as in representative) investigations into serious matters such as this. It should also follow remedies through, having alerted the authorities. My criticism is that it goes public too quickly, often with a sensational headline, on a limited small-scale investigation. Oregano?
Perhaps it should be more discriminating in its list of investigations, but do them more thoroughly and with tenacity.
I’d like to have results on Xperia phones, exploding washing machines, inspection of food outlets (lack of), sorting out short life and radio-interfering LED light bulbs, illegal imported electrical items, making proper use of the Sale of Goods Act………..for example.
The trouble is, perhaps, it has monthly mags to fill.

Derek – Thanks for some informative comments. Can you suggest what needs to be done to ensure that as far as possible, all work done on gas appliances is done to a high standard? You mention the unrealistic expectations of what an engineer can achieve in a day. I have heard this before from engineers working in other fields.

Malcolm I was prompted to send the above post following the report featured in the September edition of Which? magazine, “Should you trust your boiler engineer” Page 22, which arrived this morning. I do however possess written evidence to substantiate the claims I make.

It would be useful if the Gas Safe register of installers and repair/servicing operatives, showing details of their training and experience, and their qualifications with dates, were publicly available. As you say, someone who has spent most of their time doing gas plumbing and connexions to gas cookers might be out of date on modern boilers and unfamiliar with manufacturers’ latest models. It looks to me as though there is a need for a two-stage registration process [or three stages if an apprenticeship is included as I think it should be]. I should be surprised if a 12-week training course provides sufficient experience but it can nevertheless result in registration that means the operative can work on gas boilers, apparently without any requirement for supervision, or probationary period, or subsequent inspection. I believe it also means they can certify that the work they have done is compliant.

It seems there is a national shortage of registered gas workers running into the tens of thousands [depending on which estimate you believe]. Training providers compete to offer the quickest and lowest-cost route to registration. I question whether this approach is conducive to a proper safety system.

That is a worrying story. Many boilers are installed in high positions and in other places where it is not possible to see whether the test point tube safety cap is in place. Have the manufacturers and the HSE been informed of this problem that depends for safety on the installer and subsequent service engineers remembering to replace the safety cap? Given the fallibility of the human memory this is an unacceptable design flaw. There must be a way of providing a fail safe closure of the tube, or at the very least an audible warning signal [like a whistle] to indicate that the tube remains open. A mechanical or electrical interlock to prevent ignition would be better. This reinforces the need to have a carbon monoxide warning alarm positioned in the same area as a gas boiler. Modern houses can be almost airtight and often have very little ventilation when people close windows and doors on leaving the property.

If interested, more info re the effects of ageing on smell and taste can be found @ ageingcare.com – Problems with Sense of Smell in the Elderly.

It is a Building Regulations requirement that smoke alarms are fitted in all new properties and those let out but there is no requirement to fit a carbon monoxide alarm where a gas boiler is installed and gas detector alarms are never mentioned [the assumption being that our noses will alert us – as Beryl says, an unreliable presumption]. I have never seen gas alarms on sale alongside Smoke and CO alarms. I have never heard of the fire brigade assisting with the fitting of gas detectors.

In a house closed for several days a small build-up of gas can easily lead to a dreadful fire – it can be activated by the simple switching-on of the light as the tiny spark from the electrical contact ignites the gas [some light switches are worse for this than others]. Luckily it doesn’t happen very often but every year there are cases of houses being destroyed by gas explosions. The media never seem to follow up these stories after the immediate sensational reporting and tell us what the investigators found out about the cause. It might emerge if there is a fatality and the inquest is reported. Vulnerable people living on their own are at greater risk since they are more likely to keep all their doors and windows closed for warmth and have a tendency to cover air-bricks and other openings. They might also have old gas fires and cookers that are prone to a flame blow-out due to a sudden draught that then leaves gas escaping.

If confirmation is needed re diminishing sense of smell in the elderly more can be found @ ageingcare.com – Problems with Sense of Smell in the Elderly. It apparently starts at age 60!
Are gas engineers aware of this when training and told to be extra vigilant when servicing elderly peoples boilers?

It’s disappointing that the manufacture of hobs and gas fires without flame-failure devices continued long after these safety features were incorporated into gas boilers. Anyone with elderly relatives should think about having these appliances replaced.

Gas detectors are not uncommon where LPG is in use, for example caravans, portable buildings and boats. LPG more dense than domestic gas and may accumulate at low level, particularly in confined spaces. I have no idea whether gas detectors are available for use with domestic gas.

In my experience not all good professional engineers are chartered and most proper engineering technicians are more highly qualified than boiler service engineers.

But, like it or not, the term “service engineer” is widely used and understood.

I regard them as service engineers or field service engineers and the Gas Safe Register refers to gas engineers, but irrespective of what they are called, the standard of workmanship has got to be satisfactory.

I am very disappointed that there is still no reference to the Which? investigation on the Gas Safe Register website.

High Wavechange – did you mean to say carbon dioxide in your second para – or carbon monoxide?

There was another near-tragedy today in Cornwall when a pensioner’s home was destroyed in a gas explosion. Luckily he was pulled out alive and the fire was reported as a small one, but he is in intensive care and the blast was catastrophic. No cause has been reported yet but it once again reminds us of how vital it is to make gas safe at all times..

It should read “A carbon dioxide alarm would have alerted…” I’m glad that someone is concentrating.

I mean: “A carbon MONOXIDE alarm would have alerted…” I’m looking forward to being able to edit my mistakes.

So am I. I wouldn’t have called you “High Wavechange” if I had been able to rectify it.

I thought getting high would require more exotic vapours than either CO or CO2…

🙂 Meanwhile back on topic, I wonder why Which? tests smoke alarms but not carbon monoxide alarms.

Boy Ian, You let them have it.
What I see in this is that the tv adverts have as usual sold us something we dont need and more important something we dont actually want.
Back to my old theory that if they need to advertise it I dont need. And neither does anyone. The idea that that selling services and items that are not actually in order to keep the economy going is not in the least wise.
There are plenty of good projects that could eat up 1000s of workers.
Many years ago the Uk Gov set to work in Scotland with Hydro dams. Those dams have served us all very well and have outlived just about every other form of generation station installed since. Many at the time thought it was a waste of money just like solar and wind today and their effects on land and eco system have been nothing like the do gooders said they would
They have been brilliant pieces of British engineering and that lasted a lifetime and many have been refurbished and are expected to last as long again.
There are plenty of things that need done in this land of ours that would do some real good.
I’m rural so there is not much of this blanket, service, breakdown type cover around these parts.
For the concerned they call up the boiler guy who is local and known once a year usually in summer and have everything well serviced.
The same boiler guy spends the winter fixing the boilers that were not serviced for a couple of years.
I dont know anyone who services just about every appliance and although I have a broad range of knowledge I have the good sense to agree with you wholeheartedly in your frustration with being complained about
I know the user/customer is sold on this type of contract but its time they knew that specialising in boilers alone needs a van full of stuff. To try and cover every problem is lunacy.
Near every consumer bit of research suggests that taking insurance out on appliances is a waste of money so how can boiler and appliance cover be any different.
Under such pressure ever engineer will simply do as little as he can to get him out the door. That is not service, that is not maintenance.
I had experience of this British concept of swapping trades.
I worked for a company who needed engineers/companies to install machines.
We had builders who thought because there was a concrete base they could do it
We had telephone engineers who thought they could do it because they somehow thought they could do it
We had just about every trade under the sun and our company took all comers.
Ii conducted the training which was a two day course
I found guys texting below the table
I found guys dozing off
Worse still I trained guys who after-ward went no further than their office and sent rank amatuers out to site
I went to France to find a team of sewer pipe engineers working at our machines. Their vehicles were full of plastic pipe fittings
I found builders had installed electrical items
There was just about nothing that did not happen
All repeat ALL of these guys in the UK were reg approved under Gov regulation. The Standard, the testing was a joke. Someone serious about the thing might have been okay but most were just there to get in on the latest thing.
The industry more or less ended up a disaster and personally I ended up with bad heath and would have been better never there. It took two years of head hunting for me to give in and go there.
There are still machines running and will be for some time and most of those machines are maintained by their owner/operators and many of those machines perform well but they are maintained, they are looked at.
In many other countries trades men/journeymen are qualified for their post and the Gov bodies approve them. There is non of this jumping around to where the next big buck is.
Solar PV is another example many will know about where firms start up disappear just as quickly. They were yet again all experts, all with years of experience. Were did they get this experience. There were 1000s of experts within about one year. Impossible, simple.
Just try leaving here as a plumber and try to get a job as a heating engineer in Canada. You’ll have trouble enough being a plumber and if you want to be a heating engineer you’ll do your time, the full time, the full school courses etc.

Just to clarify, Ian, are you an Engineer or a Technician?

Hi Ian.

My title is a Gas Service Engineer. That’s what my employer says my job is called. I’ve also been a Maintenance Technician, the same roles but different titles. We’re also called Field Engineers, Gas Technicians, Gas Operives etc.

To me it matters not. To you it shouldn’t matter either. To some snobs its an opportunity to look down their noses at others. You may be a Chartered Engineer, all you need to know is if I happen to be looking after the care home where your mum/dad are, I will do everything I can do to make them warm and safe.

I used to have murders every year at this time. My now ex partner, used to accuse me of having affairs when I was working late. The truth was, not having any grandparents left I used to make sure I looked after everyone else’s. 14 hour days were commonplace and 16/17 hours weren’t unusual.

Those old people didn’t care what my role was called.

Thank you, Ian, and I’m not wishing to denigrate you or your role in any way. My concern is simply about perception. Engineering is a profession, with the same training length requirements, the same demands and the same intellectual requirements as Medicine, Astrophysics or Law. It’s a four/five year University course before you can start in work as an Engineer, then further research and publications before you can gain Chartership as an Engineer. This is nothing to do with snobbishness: it’s to do with identifying and differentiating the Professional who designs and regulates Gas flow through advanced fluid dynamics mathematics training from the chap who replaces some parts in a boiler. The boiler technician can be equally as caring and devoted as the Mechanical Engineer; more so, in fact, since the Mechanical Engineer rarely meets the individual whose lives depend on his knowledge, experience and training, but Engineering is a profession.

Personally I don’t draw the line that the use of the word “Engineer” must be restricted to “Chartered Engineers”. My employer does not either and a large number of my Suitably Qualified and Experienced colleagues are given job titles that include the word “Engineer”.

This includes a number of colleagues who are Chartered Physicists and hold PhDs in astronomy / astrophysics. I don’t think we have any “medics” in Engineering roles but we do certainly have colleagues with law degrees, for example, to help run the management of our supply chains.

We do encourage our graduate recruits to gain Chartership with appropriate institutions but we do not operate with any kind of “glass ceilings” above which individuals must be Chartered.

My personally background is that I a have an Engineering Degree but have never wanted to pursue Chartertered Status because it has never really been either important or very useful for the fields where I have worked.

I agree. I see little difference between Engineer and Chartered Engineer, the only difference being that Char5tered are allowed to operate as self employed specialists. “Chartered Physicist” is new to me however.

Ian / All – in the last few decades, many British institutions have gained Royal Charters so they can confer “chartered status” on their members.

As regards whether or not one might be a professional engineer (or scientist or mathematician, etc.) Wikipedia quotes this definition “A profession is a vocation founded upon specialised educational training, the purpose of which is to supply disinterested objective counsel and service to others, for a direct and definite compensation, wholly apart from expectation of other business gain”

I so I think that includes doing right by your clients or customers, rules out “up-selling” and does not require your work to be only “white-collar” / office-based.

I’ve checked out Chartered Physicist and it requires a Masters at the very least. I suspect one main difference is in the level of education required. A master’s degree confers a high level of knowledge and disinterest in a subject, so it seems the epithet ‘Professional’ is appropriate only in someone with a higher degree.

This a thorny issue, since there are no higher degrees in Woodworking, for example, yet a skilled joiner can provide invaluable and disinterested advice. And many would regard a joiner as a profession, surely?

Dee You have just summed up the change in UK industry a lot because of politics over the past 40 years of bring down heavy industry and other industries in this country. Call them “obsolete ” out of date etc bring in the service industry of MacDonalds and co. 10, of 1000,s of apprenticeships lost of every description but hey ! it serves a political end . What have we got now ,according to the many emails from tech and engineering organizations I get the UK industry is “Crying out ” for engineers of every description can they get them ??? can they -ell ! 1000,s of qualified engineers are required and I am not talking computer engineers . So what does the government do ? make it easier to obtain “credentials ” to “qualify ” people to work on equipment gone are 5 year apprenticeships /years knowledge gained over decades thrown out /binned people like myself who are qualified in several engineering /electrical/electronic repair occupations dumped because of “New Age ” thinking ” -aka- dont think OBEY !. No attempt to pass on knowledge of 50 years or more -goodbye=cheerio-its been “good to know you ” how can young people learn from that basis not just basic knowledge but inbuilt over years of work.??

Good man Duncan. Bring back trades Bring back social housing and dont sell them. Get rid of the hoards of managers in the NHS. Dont tell me they are needed because I dont begin to believe that they save anything. Save my foot. The old style system could not have overspent to the tune of these wages if they’d have tried.
Yeh a lifetime of experience, A lifetime of being requested to train and retrain move sideways and specialise to move with the times
I remember selling my LR business and an employee made comment about me having forgot more than the next lot will every learn.
This is the biggest BS system that we have now. Buy everything in. Rely on the London markets and the spin off’s. Allow those super rich to pay near no tax and in some cases no tax at all.
When we go who will answer the questions.

I hear a lot of bleating about “shortages of qualified engineers” but, mostly, I think these are really just shortages of money.

Qualified engineers expect to earn good wages. Any employers complaining about “skill shortages” should try “putting their money where their mouth is” and offering decent salaries and working conditions.

I think that proves the point I was making. An Engineer would have known about the caustic solvent, since that would have been a major part of his course. Because repair technicians have to have a very wide remit, it’s incumbent on the management to have warned the individuals about the potential risks, but with so many different appliances to service they only acquire the knowledge necessary through painful experiences. He was lucky he only got mild lip burns.

Also, a properly trained and experienced engineer would have known:

The right way to turn down an assignment that he (or she) was not content to carry out unaided and untutored.

Well it comes down to “time” or rather lack of it again. My company puts a huge emphasis on safety and training. A lot of that training involves being given a sheet of A4 with a safety advisory on, signing for it and BAM, we have now trained your for that particular item.

If we slowed down, my colleague could have read the safety advice on the bottle that was dosing the dishwasher. When your stressed/rushed you aren’t thinking properly. Companies are willing to look the other way in order to get the job done. As an example, a few years ago the company I was with, another national well known company, we’re falling behind on gas boiler services for a well known chain of pubs. They got sub contractors in to catch up. The pubs were sited far and wide, for me 2 a day was possible. Our sub contractor was managing 5/6. How ? By attending site and writing our a safety sheet without checking anything.
Our management knew how many they were doing and therefore knew it wasn’t possible, but, turned a blind eye because it suited their needs. When our bosses are asking us to falsify documents you know your on you own. Again, the client is completely unaware of what we’re up against.

Ian, I agree. As long as everything is done dirt cheap. It’ll not matter how many pieces paper is brought into the system.
We have tick boxes at every corner and all happens is that they get ticked before or after the work.
The health service is full of this stuff. Everything that goes wrong gets another sheet to fill out or box to tick.
No one has time and when they are not ticked the employees end up in the office. Answer. Tick everything because it wont be checked anyhow
Tick boxes, completion sheets and the many other seemingly well meaning efforts are a waste of time. Those who think this nonsense up have no idea of reality or they do not care as long as they can show they put a procedure in place and all the procedures have been shown to be followed. It doesnt matter a hoot whether the work was done or done right or no done at all just as long as the sheets are present and correct
As to idea’s that one has a choice about what one does many employees have no choice. Many have kids and a mortgage and the hard nosed managers know that.
This is where we find ourselves. I watched these type of things take place. The employees had no choice.
I conducted training. I had no choice about who were presented. I had 2 days too teach people who had not a clue about what they had got into. Pointless and I’m glad it near finished me and I walked away.
Bring back time served trades.

A lot of companies say they put safety first, because they cannot actually tell the truth, if they really expect production targets to trump safety concerns.