Filling gas bottles

[nicknorman]

 

If you go beyond this purpose, is it automatically theft or does it depend on other factors?

Only if you fill it with weapons grade plutonium, or my collected farts (which are far more dangerous).

[Guest]

Only if you fill it with weapons grade plutonium, or my collected farts (which are far more dangerous).

Too much information

[Phil Ambrose]

But if I start a hire agreement with Calor, I get a bottle. Once I use up the gas in it, I can (pay and) swap it with another bottle. If I keep doing that for 15 years, Calor is still 1 bottle down and I'm 1 bottle up. The same occurs if I kept bottle #1 and filled it myself. Its hard to see how Calor are worse off with respect to the number of bottles they have if I swap them, vs the number of bottles they have if I keep the same one. BY HIRING A BOTTLE, I'm depriving them of a bottle anyway, so the argument that filling your own ---> permanetly deprive simply doesn't stack up.

 

IF YOU HAVE A HIRE AGREEMENT FOR SOMETHING, YOU CAN'T BE DONE FOR THE

THEFT OF THAT SOMETHING.

By refilling the bottle you are depriving them on the profit they would have made on 15 years of exchanges

it would seem that you along with others think it is OK if the whole country each had a bottle but never used it for it's intended purpose ie an exchange gas vessel, how would that work?

Phil

Edited August 15, 2016 by Phil Ambrose

[tonyt40]

The obvious thing to do is to fill it with custard - if it did happen to explode, unlikely as it would seem, it would not be disasterous, merely comical.

Custard powder can be explosive!

 

On a more serious note.

 

Whilst I can see the financial benefit of refilling a cylinder surely the safety aspect outweighs this. Gas is gas. It is dangerous if abused wherever it is. Just like in a house leave the meddling to the experts (or those qualified to do it Mr Calor or Mr Gas safe)

Edited August 15, 2016 by tonyt40

[Guest]

Two 47kg bottles would make an excellent catamaran. I don't think Calor would sponsor it though?

[Paul C]

By refilling the bottle you are depriving them on the profit they would have made on 15 years of exchanges

it would seem that you along with others think it is OK if the whole country each had a bottle but never used it for it's intended purpose ie an exchange gas vessel, how would that work?

Phil

 

I don't think its okay, and I don't think it would work. The refilling of the bottle doesn't turn hiring that bottle into the crime of theft though.

[Phil Ambrose]

Never filled one at a garage, but the company we dealt with used to weigh the bottle as it was filled.

Weighing is the normal method, at the plant I worked at the bottles were placed on a weighing plate which cut the gas supply when the bottle reached the required weight.

Phil

[gazza]

Two 47kg bottles would make an excellent catamaran. I don't think Calor would sponsor it though?

They sponsor the Dorset steam fair along with no end of non leauge football teams.

Give em a shout, they can only say no

[mayalld]

Overfilling lots of things can create safety issues. If I overfill my wine glass and get red wine on the carpet, that is definitely an issue for my personal safety. But the obvious answer is to not overfill it. I don't see that this is an argument against refilling cylinders, it is just an argument against refilling cylinders incompetently. At a garage, you are not filling from an unmetered source. You start with an empty cylinder and put in the appropriate volume of liquid (depending on cylinder size) and job done, safely.

 

Alternatively if you fill it with a mixture of LPG, weapons grade plutonium, an old bottle of TNT and some sherbet, well anything might happen!

 

You rather miss the point.

 

Whilst it may well be true that there is a subset of the population that has sufficient common sense to strictly adhere to filling the bottle appropriately, never being distracted to have a chat with the filler running, and never tempted to squeeze a bit more in so that they don't have to fill quite as often, there is also another subset of the population that lacks those skills.

 

What we need to factor in is that we are talking here about using a device of unknown provenance and safety to do the filling.

 

If we look at our subset of people who have sufficient common sense to perform the filling operation, the overwhelming majority will also have the common sense not to touch such a device with a barge pole, and as such the majority of such devices are in the hands of complete idiots who lack the capacity to use them properly.

[Guest]

By refilling the bottle you are depriving them on the profit they would have made on 15 years of exchanges

it would seem that you along with others think it is OK if the whole country each had a bottle but never used it for it's intended purpose ie an exchange gas vessel, how would that work?

Phil

Yes but, can you really 'steal' something that somebody never was in possession of in the first place?

[nicknorman]

You rather miss the point.

 

Whilst it may well be true that there is a subset of the population that has sufficient common sense to strictly adhere to filling the bottle appropriately, never being distracted to have a chat with the filler running, and never tempted to squeeze a bit more in so that they don't have to fill quite as often, there is also another subset of the population that lacks those skills.

 

What we need to factor in is that we are talking here about using a device of unknown provenance and safety to do the filling.

 

If we look at our subset of people who have sufficient common sense to perform the filling operation, the overwhelming majority will also have the common sense not to touch such a device with a barge pole, and as such the majority of such devices are in the hands of complete idiots who lack the capacity to use them properly.

All very true but I think you have missed my point. Yes of course, refilling by incompetent people is to be discouraged. But that doesn't mean a competent person can't do it safely. You lack the skills to fly a glider safely, does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to fly my glider?

[mayalld]

All very true but I think you have missed my point. Yes of course, refilling by incompetent people is to be discouraged. But that doesn't mean a competent person can't do it safely. You lack the skills to fly a glider safely, does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to fly my glider?

 

Not at all.

 

So, we are agreed.

 

Competent people, using equipment that is known to be fit for purpose, should be allowed to refill gas bottles, and other people should not.

 

Do you see where this is going?

 

1) There is no such equipment available to buy. All that is available is of unknown quality and safety.

2) Those who buy such equipment, without worrying about the safety aspect of this dodgy kit, have proved themselves (by virtue of deciding to use the equipment) to not be competent.

 

So there we have it! Theoretical possibilities aside, anybody who self-refills a gas bottle has failed to do so using safe equipment and methods, and has shown themselves to not be competent to do so.

 

Catch-22

[Jerra]

You lack the skills to fly a glider safely, does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to fly my glider?

Not IMO a really good example as you can't (I don't think) just walk up to somewhere which provides gliders and use one. You can however just walk up to a garage and fill a cylinder (assuming the staff don't intervene). Isn't there some sort of license for gliding where as there is no form of test for an incompetent to prove competence.

[MtB]

Not IMO a really good example as you can't (I don't think) just walk up to somewhere which provides gliders and use one. You can however just walk up to a garage and fill a cylinder (assuming the staff don't intervene). Isn't there some sort of license for gliding where as there is no form of test for an incompetent to prove competence.

 

 

Of course there is.

 

There is a wide range of publicly available exams for people to take to prove their competence with gas. Google "gas ACS". I doubt there is one to assess competence to refill gas cylinders though, as it is illegal.

 

So flipping it around, if it were legal you can be pretty sure the gas training scools would be running courses on the subject!

[WotEver]

Is it really possible that we have reached a consensus?

 

Is it legal to refill a gas bottle? No.

Is it safe to refill a gas bottle? Only by the competent, who by definition probably wouldn't anyway.

Is it theft to refill a gas bottle? No. (Apparently yes, if you're going to 'torch' it afterwards, in which case everyone loses, but in the real world, no.)

 

Or have I missed something that'll cause this thread to rumble on for another 11 pages?

 

Tony

[nicknorman]

Isn't there some sort of license for gliding where as there is no form of test for an incompetent to prove competence.

 

No, I am not stupid and that is exactly why I chose gliding as an example. There is currently no requirement for any sort of glider pilot's licence and I certainly don't have one.

Is it really possible that we have reached a consensus?

 

Is it legal to refill a gas bottle? No.

Is it safe to refill a gas bottle? Only by the competent, who by definition probably wouldn't anyway.

Is it theft to refill a gas bottle? No. (Apparently yes, if you're going to 'torch' it afterwards, in which case everyone loses, but in the real world, no.)

 

Or have I missed something that'll cause this thread to rumble on for another 11 pages?

 

Tony

 

Not quite. Is it legal to refill a gas bottle? Yes, I think it is. It may be against the terms of a contract but that doesn't mean it is "illegal" ie contrary to some law. It just means it is a breach of contract, which is a civil matter.

[MtB]

I notice there is a hierarchy of 'illegalness'

 

Illegal

Unlawful

Contrary to the terms of a contract

 

Any more contributions to the list?

[nicknorman]

I notice there is a hierarchy of 'illegalness'

 

Illegal

Unlawful

Contrary to the terms of a contract

 

Any more contributions to the list?

It's not really a hierarchy. Illegal and unlawful are the same thing - ie acting contrary to some law. That is a criminal matter subject to pursuit by the crown.

 

Contrary to the terms of a contract is a private matter subject to civil legal processes under contract law.

 

I think it would be fair to say that in general, the former has an element of punishment as the penalty whereas the latter only has elements of compensation to the aggrieved party. In other words, you can't go to prison for breach of contract.

[Machpoint005]

I notice there is a hierarchy of 'illegalness'

 

Illegal

Unlawful

Contrary to the terms of a contract

 

Any more contributions to the list?

 

Bloody stupid regardless?

[nicknorman]

Bloody stupid regardless?

No, "bloody stupid if you are incompetent" and "perfectly sensible if you are competent".

[mayalld]

 

No, I am not stupid and that is exactly why I chose gliding as an example. There is currently no requirement for any sort of glider pilot's licence and I certainly don't have one.

 

Not quite. Is it legal to refill a gas bottle? Yes, I think it is. It may be against the terms of a contract but that doesn't mean it is "illegal" ie contrary to some law. It just means it is a breach of contract, which is a civil matter.

 

Not according to Calor;

 

https://www.calor.co.uk/news/calor-warns-about-unlawful-filling-of-lpg-cylinders-at-autogas-refuelling-sites/

 

Safefill (who sell refillable bottles) say that refilling Calor Bottles is theft.

 

http://www.safefill.co.uk/refilling-retailers.html

 

UKLPG position on this;

 

http://www.uklpg.org/uploads/DOC5784C95F80B79.pdf

[Paul C]

It's not really a hierarchy. Illegal and unlawful are the same thing - ie acting contrary to some law. That is a criminal matter subject to pursuit by the crown.

 

Contrary to the terms of a contract is a private matter subject to civil legal processes under contract law.

 

I think it would be fair to say that in general, the former has an element of punishment as the penalty whereas the latter only has elements of compensation to the aggrieved party. In other words, you can't go to prison for breach of contract.

 

Exactly. And also, simply being in breach of a contract doesn't mean its illegal (in civil law). It would need to be proven to be a breach, and also that contract term would need to be deemed reasonable. There is a valid argument to say that some terms of the Calor agreement aren't reasonable, eg their insistence the bottle is only filled by them, by swapping, at a price which many may argue is unreasonable in itself. There's arguments on both sides though, for example Calor may claim that their safety checks on the bottle condition mean its impossible to safely allow users to fill their own bottles, or even for a competitive bottle/gas supplier to do so etc.

[nicknorman]

Not according to Calor;

 

https://www.calor.co.uk/news/calor-warns-about-unlawful-filling-of-lpg-cylinders-at-autogas-refuelling-sites/

 

Safefill (who sell refillable bottles) say that refilling Calor Bottles is theft.

 

http://www.safefill.co.uk/refilling-retailers.html

 

UKLPG position on this;

 

http://www.uklpg.org/uploads/DOC5784C95F80B79.pdf

I could only be bothered to read your first link and it is clearly protectionist bullshit. The laws quoted may well be being broken by the seller, but not by the buyer. As soon as one sees "it is against ElfinSafety" without any specific section of any specific law being cited, one can pretty much guarantee it is bullshit.

 

I didn't read the safefill one but they are trying to sell you a cylinder, what do you expect them to say?

 

I didn't read the uklpg one but since it is a trade body sponsored by calor, what do you expect them to say?

Edited August 16, 2016 by nicknorman

[Paul C]

 

Not according to Calor;

 

https://www.calor.co.uk/news/calor-warns-about-unlawful-filling-of-lpg-cylinders-at-autogas-refuelling-sites/

 

Safefill (who sell refillable bottles) say that refilling Calor Bottles is theft.

 

http://www.safefill.co.uk/refilling-retailers.html

 

UKLPG position on this;

 

http://www.uklpg.org/uploads/DOC5784C95F80B79.pdf

 

I didn't even bother to click the Calor link because its not impartial. Safefill have a vested interest too (and use the phraseology "could"). The last link doesn't mention theft, but mentions a bunch of other regulations.

[mayalld]

No, "bloody stupid if you are incompetent" and "perfectly sensible if you are competent".

 

Bloody stupid if you are incompetent, and perfectly sensible but unachievable if you are competent.

 

As I said before, if you are competent you will realise that the equipment to do this safely is not available to you. The instant you decide to use the equipment that is out there, you have shown that you are not competent.