Background to the gas safety concern
In July 2022 I purchased a Robinson Willey Firecharm LS Electronic gas fire GC Number 32.689.33. Prior to that I downloaded the Manufacturer's Instructions (MI) for the appliance from the manufacturer's website. The householder had specific instructions on the installation and I needed to determine what work would be required as that would impact on cost. Given the existing high quality marble surround and hearth did not need to be disturbed or altered, the job proceeded. If anyone wants to research the appliance they will need to visit the website. Lay people please note the LS appliance there should not be confused with the RS (Room Sealed) model of similar name but different GC Number.

Questions connected with MI and other matters caused me to write to Glen Dimplex by letter as the email address on the MI (Robinson Willey) is no longer valid. At the same time I pointed out to Glen Dimplex that there appeared to be significant disparities between the downloaded MI and the hardcopy MI supplied with the appliance. Differences which could profoundly affect gas safety. Someone else (with clean hands) was fortunately perusing the hardcopy MI at the same time. There should not be any MI differences. This is a huge red flag to any Registered Gas Installer (RGI).

The reply from Glen Dimplex was somewhat cryptic. Probably an exercise in obfuscation. Another red flag. Three separate spaced sentences which made me suspicious, as follows:

Sentence One: "I have heard back from technical and I have been advised the manual on the website is version 7 and thanks to you that will be updated to the new version 8".

The reply was on August 8 and the MI online, which carries the reference 987618 Issue7 has still not been changed. You will soon learn, as I already knew, that the "new version 8" is already more than 3 years overdue. In any case as you will also discover, there should actually be two MI online for the same gas fire name and GC Number. The hardcopy MI supplied with the appliance (correct for that appliance) is profoundly different and has been faithfully scanned (300dpi) and reproduced by me as a PDF. It has the reference 300001217_2 (not version 8!). Anyone can compare the two MI but only a RGI will necessarily realise the gas-safety significance. Another red flag.

Sentence two: "Since June 2019 there is no restrictor, this is why the manuals looked different".

Another red flag. Not just how it is badly written but what is written. You can tell immediately they are hiding something that should be disclosed but they have not disclosed. The manuals not only 'looked' different as they put it, they patently are different. Profoundly different actually. In any case, there should never be two radically different MI for the same GC Number. That is unheard of in my long experience and potentially unsafe for reasons that will be disclosed. The restrictor will be discussed under a new heading 'The Restrictor'.

Sentence three: "The draft (sic) divert (sic) spillage test is now done at the back of the fire, I attached (sic) a diagram to show where this is, look at top dotted line fig 8 in manual".

This last sentence raises significant questions which will require its own page and have the heading 'Spillage Test'. Another red flag.

You might be forgiven for believing the appliance has been altered in some physical way. Indeed it obviously has been altered but as yet I do not have any physical or written evidence of precisely what, apart from the deliberately obscure and suspicious responses above. The deliberately cryptic style of sentence two might be to conceal evidence of a physical change. That must be clarified in due course. If true then in my opinion it is not the same appliance and should have a different GC Number to avoid confusion. Another red flag. I believe that technically the 'performance' of the appliance has also changed, hence the altered spillage test, and that demands a new GC Number.

Aside from all this, the obvious physical changes to the MI (we do at least have that irrefutable evidence) look unprofessional to me. I refuse to believe that an approved Notified Body in the United Kingdom in 2022, has had oversight of that MI. That will be dealt with under a different heading of 'MI Changes'.

To avoid this page becoming too long I will split off the matters mentioned above. The bottom line here is that only the old MI is online at Valor and there is no reference to any changes that have taken place. We have the proof of MI changes but so far that is all we have. That must change. The HSE have been asked to investigate. It is very much in the public interest. It could not be more so.
Return to Home Page
Previous page Next Page