I'm Sorry my work round to produce paragraphs seems to have been blocked. Please take your time and read this carefully.
I have no objection to you using the content of this public forum provided it’s with Haymarket's agreement.
I think Gaffer and Clive have slightly missed the point. The issue is not how the flame ignited, but the action of the gas valve and any Flame Failure Device which should have cut the gas supply to the burner. It appears the FFD did not cut the gas to the oven supply allowing unburnt gas to collect and form a combustible mixture inside the oven. The oven would have blown with any source of ignition so the type of ignition is not relevant in this case. The appliance had just been repaired/modified and should have been proven by the fitter to be safely working to the manufacturers specification.
Gas Safety is an issue very close to my heart and I know from my own experience the appliance company I worked for would have had an engineer or a team on their way to an end-user in minutes of such an event being reported. I am also delighted to find Damiam in complete agreement, his experience is far more current than my own.
DD If you still have edit facilities on the posting I suggest it might be wise to remove your comment concerning the award the dealer received as this might enable them to be identified, and as we know when a dispute arises between a customer and a dealer it should kept private. and only discussed in public using general terms. Perhaps the Mods might help. We would obviously like to be kept informed of progress.
I am not vindictive, and I don't wish the dealership ill fortune, but this smacks of professional incompetence at four different levels.
The first is the repair work was not correctly completed and safety checked by the technician. Was the fitter actually certified competent to work on gas appliances?
Secondly Its good practice on safety critical work for such jobs to be managed by way of a job card/work sheet which should require the fitter to mark or sign when safety tests have been completed satisfactorily - Either the fitter forgot to do them, or for, or lied about completing them.
Thirdly, If the test confirmation was not marked on the card , the Service Manager is also at fault for not having a system for spotting the missing test marks and immediately flagging them up.
Fourthly, The response you got from the dealer when reporting the problem was wholly inadequate and could be deemed negligent as it falls criminally short of meeting their legal obligations under GSIAUR,and as Damian has pointed out RIDDOR.
If only one of the above stages had occurred it would still be serious but it could be down to a genuine mistake, but for all four activities to have occurred suggests that there are major shortcomings in the management and and competence of the service department.
They need a strong response to alert them to their responsibilities. If they are a genuinely customer orientated business, they will respect you not rebuke you for alerting them to the error of their ways. Its only a question of the prevailing circumstances that DD was not more seriously injured. So the scale of the injury is not as relevant as the scale of the potential injury, which if we are honest could have been long term disablement or a fire in the caravan leading to loss of life.
The boot is very definitely on your foot, It is up to you if you want to use it.