Posted by: @papahuhu

↑

@ashp-bobba 

Thats interesting thanks. So they were more concerned about building regs/safety issues rather than MCS regs, I can see some logic behind that, pressurised system regs are there to prevent injury or worse. How often are you supposed to replace the pressure relief valve please and does anyone ever do it? I guess it’s designed to fail open, as opposed to closed.

So under part G or the G3 rules you have a responsibility as the home owner to make sure the hot water system remains safe, this would likely involve following the manufacturers instructions which mostly recommend servicing the system once per year, now this is not a legal requirement and is not mandated by law, If you are a landlord or a hot water cylinder at you company you are mandated to this though. So for a private home owner this is more down to insurance, for example, if in the unfortunate event your tank manages to explode, pull the ceiling down and land on a guest lets say, you would likely not be insured under your home insurance due to negligence (basically not having the system service) which probably accounts for 75% of private homes.

An installer and or maintenance company must be qualified to touch a cylinder by law, so next time you have someone fixing it make sure they are G3 qualified this is a rule, this is also a separate qualification to plumbing or heating, gas or oil, it is specific to cylinders. 

There is no fixed timeline for age deterioration, there is no fixed calibration testing available in the field so the checks are a function test and reseal test a feeling test, if the spring feels warn you change it, if it does not open properly you change it, if it leaks or weeps you change it, these valves are £30 and can be changed in an hour or quicker. 

Most valves last 5-10 years with no issues, if there is scale in the system as soon as you test these valves on year 1 they break and the get changed, so the rule is just function and feel, inspection and test.

@editor We had our MCS quality audit this morning. 
10 mins in total to cover heat pump and solar. He only superficially checked the “as built” status. Concentrating on where the outside unit was situated and that that it was level and within distance tolerances. Then checked the basics of the DHW cyclinder and ancillary connections and that that it met the building regs. Then visually checked the power supply, labelling and consumer unit. His only comment was that it was one of the best installs he’d seen and that that many were shockingly bad.

Then went on to the PV, looking at the DC and AC wiring, we agreed on the same deficiencies that I was already aware of and that he’d include them in his report. It’s not clear to me whether this will result in mandatory remediation or not.

Nice bloke, seemed to focus on the safety critical items, which makes some sense if you have limited time. Not going to look good for MCS if following an audit their hot water tank goes up like a grenade. 

I suspect it would be more useful for remediation if it were a hazardous install.

@papahuhu We had an MCS audit on our PV and ASHP. Inspector flagged up some lagging and label deficiencies. Some weeks later, an engineer from the installers turns up un-announced to carry out the tasks required. Whilst he was in the building, I made him aware of some 'issues' that I had become aware of through running the system. He investigated thoroughly, installed a data transfer unit which had been omitted in error, electrically un installed a secondary pump which was unnecessary for the circuit's correct operation and reduced the speed of the main pump to bring flow rate and dT within spec. You might even suggest that he 're- commissioned' it, except that it probably hadn't been previously. The system now works well and the solar PV system is fab. 

For me it was a case of installer given a chance to came good - which he took - as a result of the MCS audit. I'm not sure that they would have been back otherwise. 

@giganto That sounds like a very worthwhile exercise, justifying their existence.

From my experience with installers and complaints, I’ve seen them ambivalent to MCS but very sensitive to complaints going to their professional body. Just a mention of going to the NICEIC gets an immediate change in attitude, but maybe mine was already in hot water with them. 
i have another quality audit tomorrow, this time it’s the installers internal auditors looking at the overall design as we went through ECO4 LAFLEX.

My system was installed 2019 and we were notified in 2022 that we were selected for MCS audit.  The first part was a desktop audit completed by supplying copies of all the appropriate certificates and  pre installation documents, installers quotation and handover paperwork and photos of the;  HP location, manufacturers label, access to loft for solar thermal inspection and all that documentation , DHW tank and FTC5 and also proof of house ownership.

This was followed by an inspection visit which took about 30 minutes where he photographed every accessible part of the system, had a cup of tea and a scone and said we had an excellent installation.  This was followed by a NAPIT inspection asked for by the installer to certify his work. They were happy too.  All in all no big deal for us, other than increased peace of mind.

@papahuhu I hear on the news that a few ECO4 insulation installers are just about to be plunged into the hot water. I think I heard that some £44,000,000 had been ‘misappropriated’ by them. Regards, Toodles.

@toodles The whole scheme is a shocking waste of money. At least the standard scheme delivers some energy performance improvements to those on low incomes, albeit it offering poor value for money from the funders (ofgen and the energy suppliers). But there is another scheme, a non means tested scheme, that some councils run whereby those with high incomes and at least one householder with certain health conditions can qualify for. I initially applied as we had a large drafty house that really wasn’t viable to heat enough for very old sick people, I was looking to get a bit of funding for roof insulation. To cut a long story short, we ended up getting £60k of funding from ECO and GBIS. We either had to do it all to qualify or we got nothing, if I was more principled I should have told them to stick it. But didn’t as was greedy and selfish. New roof, 14kwp PV, PW3 home battery, heat pump and brand new CH system and a load of insulation measures and ventilation upgrades. 

I’m convinced that brown envelopes were exchanged between my LA and the retrofitter, there’s no other explanation for designating them as sole providers.

Resurrecting an old thread. I got a call from MCS this morning asking me to agree to a visit/audit.

As I have had to call my installer back to resolve some broken joint issues with Primary Pro external pipe installation, I shall be interested to hear if they have any comments. The guy that I spoke with seemed surprised when I told him that he was welcome to inspect my HW cylinder but it wasn’t part of the heat pump installation.

Out-of-interest, do MCS surveyors have any professional qualifications or is this just a tick box exercise? I recall an audit on the PV solar system that I had installed at my previous home and it clearly became obvious to me that the surveyor was out of his depth. Two weeks earlier, he had been a salesman for Adjustamatic Beds.

As a courtesy, I have let my installer know what is happening.

@l8again I can only comment that when I had the MCS follow up phone call after installation, I could swear that I could hear the glee in the interviewer’s voice as he ticked all the boxes on that form. All questions were ones that could be answered ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ and there seemed to be no time or space for comment on any aspects at all. The installer passed or failed but I doubt that with the questions I was asked there was much room for ‘Fail’. Box Ticking was certainly the impression I was left with. It so happened my installation (though very protracted due to shortages of materials so soon after Covid-19 fallout) went well and I had no need to comment in the negative sense - but I had the feeling it would have made little difference anyway. Regards, Toodles.

@l8again I had one. The chap whom did mine seemed to know less than me, which is an achievement in itself. I never received a copy, nor feedback.10 mins if I recall correctly.
The cynic in me suspects their primary objective is to demonstrate a duty of care in the event of litigation for injury or fatality. Largely pressure vessel and electrical safety building regs.

I got hit with an RHI audit in 2022.  It was far from cursory.  The initial check was a desk audit of all my MCS compliance certificates, all of the commissioning documents, all the maintenance and service logs, extensive photos of the installation and even proof of ownership of the property.  The visiting surveyor knew what he was looking at and what he was looking for,  but seemed content to check that the supplied documentation matched the installation. Helpfully my installer had the system audited by NAPIT after installation as an transparent check that he had done the work correctly so there was nothing to find.  All in,  he was on site for about 45 minutes and I received a feedback email  a couple of weeks after to say they were satisfied.