Completely off track?

[Dave Abraham]

Originally Posted by Rydive

Erm, no that's not what I'm saying at all. If you read my post again you'll see that what I actually said is that I find it more reasonable for a shop to offer a cheaper fill to a customer who has had his cylinders cleaned there, as opposed to refusing to do a nitrox fill at all. After all, like you say, it wouldn't be very practical if you could only get your cylinder filled in one location.

So, in fact, Im saying the exact opposite. Hope that helps.

Re read it and yes I can see what you are saying. Must have had a brain freeze earlier.

Any how if I have a cylinder that's in test with an up to date O2 cleaned sticker an some guy tells me he won't fill it with nitrox unless he inspects it then he won't be taking any business from me ever. If we all do the same he goes bust and serves him right.

[Hickdive]

I was not at all referring to 02 cleaning or the cylinders being in oxygen service or not. I was specifically referring to the practice of insisting on taking a brand new cylinder in to be 'checked', allegedly to ensure the valve and neck threads matched and were not crossed, prior to filling at all.

There is no industry standard for 02 cleaning and that's a side issue, however there is an industry standard for the testing and inspection of cylinders (which includes the testing of neck threads) which is UKAS or IDEST accreditation as required by the HSE. The LDS in question has neither so, as I say, are no more competent legally to carry out the removal of a cylinder valve, inspection of the threads and replacement of the valve than anyone else who is not UKAS or IDEST accredited. The difference is they are charging for the work and without the necessary accreditation you have no reasonable grounds to assume that it has been done correctly or not.

Put it another way - if you buy a cylinder, say from Go-Dive (IDEST accredited) and take it into the LDS in question (not IDEST accredited). The LDS say they won't fill it without checking it and there's a fee for that. You comply and later, at another filling station, there's an accident where the incorrectly installed valve comes out damaging property or injuring someone. Who is going to be liable? Go-Dive? No, they'll point out that they are properly accredited and therefore the cylinder left them properly assembled. The LDS? Debateable. You? Well, you gave an unauthorised body, which you knew to be unauthorised, the go-ahead to remove the valve and re-install it, Wolfson v. Forester anyone? You might as well have done the job yourself for any liability that may ensue.

Now, I'm not for a moment suggesting that the LDS is actually incompetent to do the job, it's just that in the eyes of the law they've not been proven competent.

If they want to put a big sign on the wall saying that brand new, empty cylinders will be subject to a surcharge of £11 on first filling because they are trying to protect their business, well no-one is going to be pleased but you'll have the choice of accepting it or buying your cylinders from the LDS. But what I object to is the implication that there is some kind of 'safety' issue involved when plainly there isn't and the fact that they'll take the cylinder off you for at least a week whilst their 'checks' are conducted, charge you for the privilege and then potentially leave you with any liability if something goes wrong because they aren't accredited to do the work they're charging for.

Now, as to the matter of Nitrox fills, well I actually concur that the above LDS has the better policy, but they could market it better. For example, instead of pricing nitrox fills as costing extra if the cylinder was cleaned elsewhere, why not advertise the price as being what it is BUT you get £1 off every fill if your cylinder was cleaned by them? Why not advertise the cleaning service as entitling you to discounts on fills? As it is, it is priced as if they are charging extra 'danger money'.

The other LDS with its 'no fill unless we cleaned it' policy obviously has various problems. They're a member of SITA and it is SITA that have decided that cylinders must be cleaned annually and this LDS enforces that, but they don't recognise cleans conducted by fellow SITA members? They accept the SITA standard of annual cleaning but don't accept that other SITA members can clean cylinders; what's up with that? Of course they have absolutely no idea whether or not the cylinders they do clean are filled elsewhere in between any fills they might put in; a fact that most other nitrox filling stations I've ever encountered seems to accept. There seems to be, in this other LDS, resentment that they don't sell a lot of nitrox, certainly their casual attitude to ensuring there's O2 in stock suggests this. However, they would sell a lot more nitrox if their attitude was more realistic. I WANT to use nitrox, I'd use it all the time for most of my diving and I want to buy it from THEM and I don't believe for a second that I'm alone in this. But this LDS is in a Catch 22, they won't sell more nitrox until they let people buy it.

We've only got the two LDS to choose from unless we want to make the huge alternative round trips. Is it too much to expect that those two LDS actually treat customers with some respect and grow their businesses on the basis of that respect or are they attempting to make money by grasping policies and restrictive trade and treating customers as ignoramuses? Which business strategy do you think will work in the long term? Over the years I’ve seen three LDS, that I used, go to the wall locally. There’s been another couple that have folded. There simply isn’t the trade in this area to support both of the remaining shops especially if they shoot themselves in the foot with regard to their practices. Enlightened self-interest means I want to see those shops remain in business and thrive but how can I support them when they simply will not sell me what I want to buy?

Scuba Industries Trade Association Members Area

[Rydive]

From what I can see, neither of the LDS in question are on the IDEST list. Is it that work is normally outsourced to Patersons or C & C?

[neilh]

Originally Posted by Hickdive

There is no industry standard for 02 cleaning and that's a side issue, however there is an industry standard for the testing and inspection of cylinders (which includes the testing of neck threads) which is UKAS or IDEST accreditation as required by the HSE. The LDS in question has neither so, as I say, are no more competent legally to carry out the removal of a cylinder valve, inspection of the threads and replacement of the valve than anyone else who is not UKAS or IDEST accredited.

Fair point, that sounds out of order to me

Originally Posted by Hickdive

We've only got the two LDS to choose from unless we want to make the huge alternative round trips. Is it too much to expect that those two LDS actually treat customers with some respect and grow their businesses on the basis of that respect or are they attempting to make money by grasping policies and restrictive trade and treating customers as ignoramuses?

However sadly it sounds as though they've pretty much got you over a barrel. If the only other option is a huge round trip then I guess you'll probably end up having to use them

[Hickdive]

Originally Posted by Rydive

From what I can see, neither of the LDS in question are on the IDEST list. Is it that work is normally outsourced to Patersons or C & C?

AFAIK one of them sends bottles to an IDEST station in Aberdeen. I don't know what the other one does with theirs, hopefully not testing them in house.

[Dave Abraham]

Originally Posted by neilh

Fair point, that sounds out of order to me




However sadly it sounds as though they've pretty much got you over a barrel. If the only other option is a huge round trip then I guess you'll probably end up having to use them

You could always get yourself a compressor and some O2 and do it yourself, not sure I would be keen though I saw a photo somewhere where some dozy bugger blew up his garage doing just that.