Posted by: @judith

↑

But I suspect there is a lot of complacency in Whitehall about how many people are truly pleased and not been messed around with by a poorly trained installer.

Without a survey their only source of data is probably MCS.  We know what they are like!

@jamespa MCS are good gardeners … “Everything in the Garden is Rosey”. Toodles.

Interesting update, we were audited by Ofgem on Friday afternoon, MCS a while ago and RECC recently as well as a paper exercise by APHC so they are all auditing us if no one else. I am proud to say that with the Ofgem audit we have done the full house and in all cases the reports back were a credit to outstanding.

Our client just emailed me and said, all went well with Ofgem, they were here only a short while and said the installation looks great and very good and neat insulation job. They have asked for all of the paperwork which all looks in place.

Our client was asked with only 24hrs notice if they could do an on the spot check which he agreed and then told me that day.

Everything in place and dated mid September was:

MCS, WBG-INS, BC certificates, commissioning certificate, Electrical certificate, gas removal certificate, registration, DNO certificate, equipment certificate of compliance, G3 compliance, warranty certificate, maintenance and O&M's, complete design with drawing (we even signed the legal bit of the cylinder on the cylinder for BenchMark which everyone forgets).

So the question is, what happens when they find an installation with half this stuff is not done? I am pleased to say it is unlikely we AAC Group will ever find that out as I intend to not allow any project to breach this minimum standard, in my mind, the works audited are not outstanding they are correct, complete and compliant to the same good standard as the 10 before it and the 10 before that. I noticed there are now awards for outstanding contractor for this and for that in the ASHP world which is nice but it is an award for doing your job correctly, in this case we are in the top 10 every week as we get rewarded a nice fee for doing the job correctly every week all year, our customers pay very good money for a heating solution this is reward enough. Outstanding is when you help other people that are stuck with a system and the original installer is nowhere to be seen, try sorting those messes out.

All the above is said with a small amount of pride that we sale through these audits and make the auditors life easy. 

Posted by: @ashp-bobba

↑

All the above is said with a small amount of pride that we sale through these audits and make the auditors life easy. 

 

Its great to hear of your approach and success with the audits.

Perhaps one simple step that the industry could take to force out some of the less diligent contractors is for audit results to be published, much like food hygiene ratings.  Perhaps this could even be made mandatory?  Its clear that the public urgently need a mechanism to distinguish the ashp-bobbas from the ashp-slobbas!

@jamespa but is MCS capable of knowing the difference between a good, indifferent or bad installation? They seem to first check the paperwork is present, (but from posts here we know it often isn’t) and then ask the owner if they are happy.

But everyone here knows MCS doesn’t know what stds to apply. 
If MCS knew 1* from 5* then I would agree to publicise. We know that they probably don’t appreciate it and the chances are that they would mark a robust install down for a paperwork item missing (easily rectified) and pass one which is both poorly designed and badly implemented .

Posted by: @judith

↑

@jamespa but is MCS capable of knowing the difference between a good, indifferent or bad installation? They seem to first check the paperwork is present, (but from posts here we know it often isn’t) and then ask the owner if they are happy.

But everyone here knows MCS doesn’t know what stds to apply. 
If MCS knew 1* from 5* then I would agree to publicise. We know that they probably don’t appreciate it and the chances are that they would mark a robust install down for a paperwork item missing (easily rectified) and pass one which is both poorly designed and badly implemented .

Fair comment. 

I have a feeling that ratings more generally have become subject to fears over liability.  Its utter rubbish, but can you prove it?  If not then you can be sued.  Easier and safer (but wholly useless) just to check for the existence of paperwork!