I don't know if this is a heat pump installer-specific issue, to be honest, as my experience with a lot of the skilled trades is that they will quite often say anything to get out of having to do things properly. They often get away with it too, because most of the general public don't know how things are meant to be.

We experienced this multiple times when we moved into our new flat a couple of years back, even with the most simple things.

For example, we had some missing bits of trim around some of our windows. The tradies sent out to look at it tried to act like they were just cosmetic, but I personally reached out to the window suppliers and they made it clear that the trim pieces were necessary to avoid water ingress, and that their warranty would not be valid without them in place.

The builders also failed to follow the building regs when installing the MEV system, with the kitchen vent left unconnected, and no vent at all put in the utility room. Again, the building services engineer who came out to look at it acted like it was completely normal until I started quoting chapter and verse in the building standards (and then followed up with emails from the local building standards to confirm my reading of the information).

When it came to the heating system, however, there were so many more levels to it.

Every fault had to be exhaustively documented and described before they would do anything more than turn up, look at the system (without actually touching it, just looking at it from a distance), and declare that it's all working as expected.

Zone thermostats connected to the wrong zone valves? "Ahh, no, there's controls on it to make sure it's not overheating." Yeah. I know. They're called thermostats. And they're connected to the wrong valves.

Zone thermostats fitted without floor temperature sensors? "Ahh, no, they were definitely specced, so we fitted them. Did you fiddle with the stat somehow?" Yeah, mate. I fiddled. I took a look at the back plate and found that there was no floor temperature sensor ever fitted.

Whole system is ruinously expensive to run (for an 'energy-efficient flat', anyway) and incapable of providing ample hot water when the heating is needed? "Ahh, well, it's heat pumps, innit? Everyone knows they don't really work. But that was what they designed. Nuffin' I can do, mate. Just buy some fan heaters."

Fortunately, I have an engineering background, and a willingness to research any problem I encounter until I'm absolutely certain of what the problem actually is and all their attempts to brush me off or to pretend like the issues weren't real failed miserably. Our neighbours, however, didn't have my background.

In one instance, an elderly neighbour complained that their heating wasn't working at all (it 'worked' to a level, but couldn't warm the flat above about 20C in even marginal weather). The engineer who came out 'tightened' the inlet air duct on the Heat pump hot water tank and told them straight to their face that that would help. They had no real choice but to accept their word on it, but of course it didn't change a thing. Even now, that neighbour is almost entirely reliant on plug-in fan heaters for their heating.

In another instance, the tank was frequently venting through the pressure relief valve, and the resident raised the issue of 'frequent rushing water sounds' from the unit. Again, an engineer turned up, looked at it from a distance and proclaimed it all good. "It'll just be the condensate drain." Only when the amount of released water resulted in significant damp and mould issues was it actually fixed.

Another neighbour moved in to find a system that didn't work at all. The system was unpressurised, and the filling loop had been removed entirely. Despite this, the engineer who'd gone in to look at it had proclaimed it "Working, it's just not cold enough yet for the heating to come on."

I've done what I can to explain to our neighbours exactly what they should report to the builder if they want things fixed because the sad fact is that any issue like "It's cold", "It's expensive" or "It's not working" will invariably lead to zero investigation from the trades involved, and they'll instead try to blame the resident for using it wrong, or not understanding.

The elderly resident from earlier, shortly after they moved in, had found that their flat couldn't go much above 20C and so as a test, they set all their thermostats to 30C so that they could be sure that the heating was on in all areas. They weren't trying to get the property to 30C. They just wanted something more than 20C. But the engineers called out to look at her problems just focused on the 30C thing. "Oh no," they said, "It's not designed to go to 30C. That'll never work." Completely ignoring the fact that it is designed to maintain 21C at -4C OAT and shouldn't be struggling to manage 20C at +5C OAT.

And that's even before I try to count up all the occasions where neighbours were told their systems had been properly calibrated and that they shouldn't touch it, only for me to go in and to find that they were often underpressure, with pumps in the wrong mode, with wrongly connected or inoperable zone valves, and seemingly randomly chosen temperatures and completely unbalanced manifolds.

Genuinely infuriating to see.

I moved to a new build 18 months ago with a 2 year warranty period.  The builder has completely ignored any requests for remedial action.

• Oversized heat pump
• Contaminated underfloor as a result of no biocide being added
• Failure of the expansion vessel.

Going through a protracted legal battle is of little point and not worth the stress.

I was asked to help a lady who had an Ideal heat pump installed under the ECO4 scheme.  She asked for help, because the lounge thermometer was reporting 28C.  I suspected that the three step installation process had not been followed.  

I rang the Deal help desk and reported the symptoms.  He responded immediately "The installer hasn't run the three step installation process.  This comes up a lot."  I ran the process, which took all of 5 minutes.  Suddenly, the room thermostat and weather compensation started doing their job.

Don’t know if this is relevant to this thread, but my ASHP installation was reviewed by MCS as part of an installer audit

As far as I could tell, the MCS chap just looked at the state of the pipe work inside and out (took 20 mins mind you).

Not once was I asked if the system a) did its job b) met the design criteria c) what parameters the system was running under d) saved us money e) am I happy with it. As it happens, a) yes it does b) yes it did c) won’t bore with numbers d) yes it is e) very

But I do have very neat pipework

@gruff2001, your experience exposes the MCS audit for what it truly is… a shallow, perfunctory box-ticking exercise masquerading as serious oversight. 

Twenty minutes spent appraising the cosmetic neatness of pipework, with zero interest in whether the system actually performs, runs efficiently or satisfies the homeowner, is a complete and utter waste of time and resources. 

I just don’t get it. 

@editor @gruff2001 

FWIW mine was also audited.  The problem I perceive based on my experience is that (it appears) that the installer has to identify someone to be audited and seek their permission, and of course they are going to identify someone who, like me, is happy.  I don't actually know if there is a process whereby a random audit is carried out.

The auditor stayed for over an hour but much of that was chatting about the industry.  He did ask if I was happy, checked the DHW tank, the installation around the heat pump and the installation around the controls.  He suggested (sensibly IMHO) that the installer should remove the lever on the shut off valve between the DHW tank and the expansion vessel (the vessel is in the loft).  I told him in no uncertain terms that I wanted it left nearby in case it needed to be shut off due to flood! 

My installers next inspection is now set for 3 years time.

According to their blurb MCS going forward is going to focus more on the customer experience and resolving complaints than on box ticking exercises.  Below, for example, is what it says about 'MCS2.0' in the warm homes plan.  Note the unequivocal responsibility for resolving customer issues - something that has been absent to date.  Also note the Government oversight of the new scheme stated in the third excerpt. 

Will they deliver?  Only time will tell, but I have to agree with @editor that the track record to date doesn't give grounds for excessive optimism.

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

The problem I perceive based on my experience is that (it appears) that the installer has to identify someone to be audited and seek their permission, and of course they are going to identify someone who is happy.  I dont actually know if there is a process whereby a random audit is carried out.

That’s honestly wild. I had no idea it worked like that. I’d always assumed MCS selected a property at random from an installer’s recent jobs. If the installer is effectively choosing who gets audited, then the whole exercise starts to look extremely theatrical. Of course they’re going to put forward a homeowner who’s 'happy' and unlikely to rock the boat. 

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

He did ask if I was happy, checked the DHW tank, the installation around the heat pump and the installation around the controls. 

I also hadn't realised (or just forgot) you'd been audited. I've always wondered how technically capable the assessors are when it comes to heat pumps and low temp heating system. And I don’t mean spotting the obvious stuff like messy pipework or poor lagging, anyone can do that. I mean the harder things like design assumptions, emitter sizing, hydraulic choices, control strategy, flow rates, dT, commissioning data and whether the system is actually operating as designed. I'm guessing from what's been said above that's not look at all!

@gruff2001 I had an MCS inspection on Tuesday.  He checked whether we had a proper soak-away for defrosting the heat pump, looked at the pipework around the heat pump, checked the hot water cylinder and pipework in the loft especially pressure relief valves and where the excess water goes, and the consumer unit to make sure the heat pump had a dedicated circuit.

He commented that the house was nice and asked me if I was pleased with it.  I replied that I was.  He did not ask me about the COP, whether my bills were too high, how the actual performance compared to the documentation submitted to MCS...  He asked me if I had been sent an MCS document, to which I replied no.  He checked their records and said yes I had, so I can't have noticed its arrival.

I must say I was underwhelmed.

Posted by: @grahamf

↑

He did not ask me about the COP, whether my bills were too high, how the actual performance compared to the documentation submitted to MCS...

From what I've learned following MCS for five years, along with their CEO's approach to keeping a monopoly and stranglehold on the industry, they want/need to be seen as this amazing organisation that is implementing high standards, so they can post press releases and go back to government saying 90-95% of homeowners are satisfied with their installs. Asking people to comment would drive that number very quickly and wouldn't suit their narrative.

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

 

@editor @gruff2001 

 The problem I perceive based on my experience is that (it appears) that the installer has to identify someone to be audited and seek their permission, and of course they are going to identify someone who, like me, is happy.  I don't actually know if there is a process whereby a random audit is carried out.

 

 

Our experience was different, we got audited 3 times for works we had completed, twice by MCS and once by ofgem, at no point did either contact us to tell us we would be audited and with what client until the same day, they went to site without us and asked for the paperwork once they had completed the site visit. 

After I asked the clients what did they check and what did they say? it was reported that the inspections on one site was more relating to compliance and confirmation of the system working, this all took around 30 mins, the other survey by Ofgem was shorter and was just to make sure there was a system and that the grant was being claimed against works completed, (I assume this is to help prevent fraud)

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

The problem I perceive based on my experience is that (it appears) that the installer has to identify someone to be audited and seek their permission, and of course they are going to identify someone who is happy.  I dont actually know if there is a process whereby a random audit is carried out.

 

 

That’s honestly wild. I had no idea it worked like that. I’d always assumed MCS selected a property at random from an installer’s recent jobs. If the installer is effectively choosing who gets audited, then the whole exercise starts to look extremely theatrical. Of course they’re going to put forward a homeowner who’s 'happy' and unlikely to rock the boat. 

That is my understanding as well that the installer selects which ones get audited, or certainly have an influence over it. This is what our installer said and to placate us when I was complaining to them about the issues we had- they told us that they would put ours forward for inspection by MCS to reassure us that it had been completed to the correct standards. They also said that they would get NAPIT out as well.

Suffice to say neither of these two things happened and another reason why we never settled the final invoice with them.