‘Installation should be completed within 5 working days’ Regards, Toodles.

I agree there is very likely a lot of overpromising going on, but in the interest of good work getting as much publicity as bad I also have to say that my experience was of shrewd estimates ending up accurate, even down to the SCoP.

I should say as well, though, that only applies to the installer we chose to work with. Some of the others (not all) that turned up to quote were far less believable.

Posted by: @toodles

↑

‘Installation should be completed within 5 working days’ Regards, Toodles.

How long did yours take?

Like @majordennisbloodnok I can truly say no overpromises from the installer I went with, not any of the serious contenders. 

In fact I would say that promises were generally largely absent throughout (is that good or bad?)

@jamespa that’s actually a really interesting observation and maybe more telling than it sounds at first (to me anyway).

No overpromises is obviously the right outcome, but I’d argue that an industry which defaults to saying very little isn’t necessarily in great shape either. Homeowners making a £10k+ decision deserve more than an absence of bad information… I think they deserve confident, accurate, well-evidenced guidance.

The question is whether the caution you experienced reflects genuine professionalism or whether good installers have simply learned to keep quiet because the numbers are hard to stand behind. There’s a difference between an installer who says nothing because they’re honest, and one who says nothing because they’ve seen what happens when the promises don’t land. You’ve got a quality install, so I’m guessing you fall into the former category.

What made you choose the installer you went with, if it wasn’t what they were promising you?

@mars I have been thinking about your questions and observations.  There was probably some 'promises' buried in the MCS boilerplate bumph, but I didn't really take any notice.  This then lead me to think about the question - what is there to promise for a heating system?  It amounts to

• SCOP/performance/running cost 
• comfort 
• ease of control

MCS pretty much tells installers what they must say for the first of these, and unless there is an actual guarantee (which so far as I am aware, only Heat Geek give) its a bit meaningless. 

The pretty pictures of loving couples with a big fluffy dog sitting on a sofa enjoying the comfort, or of steaming showers, are just marketing fluff.  Actually there is something positive to be said about comfort in relation to heat pumps, but hardly anyone says it. 

Im not sure what to say about ease of control, its not really the 'strong suit' for any heating system, particularly one with weather compensation (which of course is what delivers the comfort benefits and, in the case of heat pumps efficiency), unless either (a) the control system features full whole system auto adaption, which only Adia does or (b) the installer comes back several times to tweak it (which few if any will) and the householder subsequently doesn't change their mind on what they want.

Knowing all of this I didn't pay much attention to any promises any prospective installer gave ,and instead was purely interested in 

1. What system they proposed to install (heat pump, cylinder, other hydraulics) and how much of the existing system they unnecessarily proposed to rip out
2. Whether they appeared to understand what they were talking about and appeared trustworthy, or were just BS merchants
3. Price
4. Accessibility for servicing/fault finding

I had two quotes which scored more or less equally on 1-3, so the decision hinged in the end on (4) and the most local installer won.

OK the above thinking is a bit random, but in the end heating is something of a utility which we just want to work in the background without any attention,  How do you sell a utility?  The answer to this is probably a big part of why operating cost is such a major focus of discussion. 

@jamespa, really thoughtful as always... for me the promise that matters most (and the one the industry consistently fails to articulate honestly) is comfort and performance. And the two are inseparable for me.

If my house needs to be 21 to feel comfortable, that's the promise if I've asked my installer to deliver that temperature and they've agreed. Everything else needs to be delivered in service of that. We had patchy comfort and patchy efficiency in our own system, and that's the lived reality of far too many installations. 

On control, you're right that it's nobody's strong suit, and I'd go further. For a technology that demands this level of precision to deliver on its promise, the control landscape is still surprisingly poor. That's a problem the industry hasn't taken seriously enough, but there are some useful tools and hardware coming so hopefully that'll change soon.

And your utility point is bang on too. Heat pumps aren't utilities yet, but I think that they're being sold as if they are. That might be the root 'overpromise' that everything else flows from.

Posted by: @editor

↑

@jamespa, really thoughtful as always... for me the promise that matters most (and the one the industry consistently fails to articulate honestly) is comfort and performance. And the two are inseparable for me.

If my house needs to be 21 to feel comfortable, that's the promise if I've asked my installer to deliver that temperature and they've agreed. Everything else needs to be delivered in service of that. We had patchy comfort and patchy efficiency in our own system, and that's the lived reality of far too many installations. 

On control, you're right that it's nobody's strong suit, and I'd go further. For a technology that demands this level of precision to deliver on its promise, the control landscape is still surprisingly poor. That's a problem the industry hasn't taken seriously enough, but there are some useful tools and hardware coming so hopefully that'll change soon.

And your utility point is bang on too. Heat pumps aren't utilities yet, but I think that they're being sold as if they are. That might be the root 'overpromise' that everything else flows from.

Very interesting. 

For me delivering a house which is for the most part at around the customer's desired temperature (provided its reasonable, say 16-24) is the core function of a heating system, so its something that should not need an express 'promise' - if I buy a bread knife I don't expect it to need a 'promise' that it will cut bread, if I buy a car I don't expect it to need a 'promise' that it will go from A to B.  By the same token I don't expect a heating system to need a promise that it will heat the house to a reasonable temperature.

Spatial and temporal consistency of the heating is not (yet) so obviously part of the core function, and is where low temperature heating has a very strong differentiator, so that might well be the subject of a 'promise', but oddly generally isn't.  Somehow we don't seem to have progressed our thinking much beyond caveman in front of fire. 

What the heating industry in general (not specifically the heat pump industry) does offer in spades is knobs to twiddle, giving an illusion of 'control' but not obviously achieving meaningful control in many cases.  A typical (boiler powered) house has a TRV in every room, sometimes each with individual time controls, a central thermostat, a timer and a couple of controls on the boiler - this really is a mind mindbogglingly complex way (from a customer perspective) to keep warm!  

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

Very interesting. 

For me delivering a house which is for the most part at around the customer's desired temperature (provided its reasonable, say 16-24) is the core function of a heating system, so its something that should not need an express 'promise' - if I buy a bread knife I don't expect it to need a 'promise' that it will cut bread, if I buy a car I don't expect it to need a 'promise' that it will go from A to B.  By the same token I don't expect a heating system to need a promise that it will heat the house to a reasonable temperature.

I totally agree.

However, there are two key problems here.

Firstly, bread knives almost always manage to cut bread and pretty much all cars are known to manage their transporting duties. In other words, not only is there a faith they'll fulfill their primary task, that faith is backed up by evidence. With a heat pump installation, there is plenty of evidence of sub-par system design and execution resulting in the faith not necessarily being there.

Secondly, if you manage to buy a bread knife that doesn't cut bread, it's easy to demonstrate it's faulty and easy to return it for a refund. It's a bit more involved with a car, but still fairly straightforward to show how many planned journeys didn't happen - either the car worked or it didn't - and get the car replaced or refunded. Certainly not the same for a heat pump; even with @editor's road crash with Global Energy Systems, it's only other expert eyes examining the system professionally that provide the evidence, and that's only been laid bare years after installation. How does one generally prove a faulty heat pump installation and get a replacement or refund? Not easy.

Posted by: @majordennisbloodnok

↑

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

Very interesting. 

For me delivering a house which is for the most part at around the customer's desired temperature (provided its reasonable, say 16-24) is the core function of a heating system, so its something that should not need an express 'promise' - if I buy a bread knife I don't expect it to need a 'promise' that it will cut bread, if I buy a car I don't expect it to need a 'promise' that it will go from A to B.  By the same token I don't expect a heating system to need a promise that it will heat the house to a reasonable temperature.

I totally agree.

However, there are two key problems here.

Firstly, bread knives almost always manage to cut bread and pretty much all cars are known to manage their transporting duties. In other words, not only is there a faith they'll fulfill their primary task, that faith is backed up by evidence. With a heat pump installation, there is plenty of evidence of sub-par system design and execution resulting in the faith not necessarily being there.

Secondly, if you manage to buy a bread knife that doesn't cut bread, it's easy to demonstrate it's faulty and easy to return it for a refund. It's a bit more involved with a car, but still fairly straightforward to show how many planned journeys didn't happen - either the car worked or it didn't - and get the car replaced or refunded. Certainly not the same for a heat pump; even with @editor's road crash with Global Energy Systems, it's only other expert eyes examining the system professionally that provide the evidence, and that's only been laid bare years after installation. How does one generally prove a faulty heat pump installation and get a replacement or refund? Not easy.

 

 

All agreed, the point I was making though was that, just as buying a car shouldn't need a promise that it gets from A to B, buying a heating system (whatever the technology) shouldn't need a promise that it heats the house, and to give one rather undermines the whole product so I cant see why Installers would.  So I dont really expect installers to give such a promise explicitly, because its implicit in the product they sell.  

The fact that some of the products are faulty is clearly a serious issue, but the financial services industry (to give just one example) has been selling faulty products with almost total impunity for decades!  Interestingly this industry now has lots of small print in which it is careful to make it clear that it promises almost nothing, perhaps the heating industry should do the same.

No, I agree entirely. There shouldn't be a need for an extra promise that what's being bought will fulfill its primary purpose, so long as, of course, the primary purpose is properly defined and understood. So far as I can see, any promises given in practice are either honest installers reassuring sceptical and worried home owners (which is a good thing) or cowboys saying whatever they need to in order to get the sale (obviously not a good thing). If we can move to a point where the former is no longer necessary and the latter is quickly caught and penalised, we'll know we're winning.

The point you make in your last paragraph is a good one. Extra small print is the last thing we need but I fear you may well be right.