I'm going to call them again and ask them to point me in the direction of a confirmed source of information that states they are within their rights to withhold the bottle.Originally Posted by rhyslightnin
Registered User
I'm going to call them again and ask them to point me in the direction of a confirmed source of information that states they are within their rights to withhold the bottle.
"FETCH IT THEN!!!!"
I'd also politely inform them that even though it may be there policy they could be breaking the law by damaging property that doesn't belong to them.
The other thing that is reliant here is if you have signed a piece of paper waiving your rights or giving them permission to withhold the bottle under there policy?
"corners should be round"Theo Evo .22/.177 - Meopta 6x42, DS huntsman classic .20 vortex razor LH 3-15x42 under supervised boingrati tuning by Tony L & Tinbum, HW77 forest green - Nikon prostaff 2-7x32 plex.
Registered User
Now then... I did sign a document to which they added details of what work was to performed i.e test etc. It could well be that it included some disclaimer to that effect.. Damn! I should have asked for a copy.
Off to work now so will have to call them tomorrow.
"FETCH IT THEN!!!!"
Ok.. a shame if it does contain a disclaimer but if it does you should still be able to get an independent 2nd opinion. This means you should be able to get them to send it to another tester of your choice to check it out. Take a look at the complaints information that rancid Tom has posted... I reckon if you contact there governing body and ask for some advice, then wave the forms above at the bottle testing company, they would be hard pushed to refuse it being sent somewhere else
They "appear" to be throwing the book at you so throw the library back at them!!
"corners should be round"
Gildenburgh???
Registered User
I recently had a cylinder tested (passed). The Inspection and Test Certificate has a customer signed statement that the cylinder and valve will be tested in accordance with EN 1802, EN 1968 or BS 5430 and should either the cylinder OR valve fail THEY will be destroyed and or not returned to the customer.
The way it's written seems to give them licence to scrap both even if either one fails! That would seem to be a liberty, as it forces the customer to stick with them for whichever part requires replacement.
However, if you were to take the cylinder elsewhere you would end up with two bills for testing plus replacement parts. So yes, short and curlies comes to mind.
Ask them to demo the no go gauge failure when you next go in.
If it is the main air outlet (DIN connection), it's huge with a course thread, as you say does not need much to compress an o-ring seal, no need to apply gorrilla force on the threads.
Treat Others As You Would Wish To Be Treated.
Hung like a Smurf !
Pretty sure the last bottle I had tested, I didn't have to sign anything when I handed it over.
LOOKING FOR A BSA ULTRA IN .177 and .25
Registered User
That's my point entirely. For example, if a car fails it's MOT, you can take it where you like to get the necessary work done and then return to the original MOT station to have it checked / confirmed safe / certificated . Don't get me wrong, I know that the £61.00 extra I've been asked to pay is nothing compared to what could happen with an unsafe 300 bar bottle but still, I think this policy is just so open to being abused by scrupulous operators and let's face it they are everywhere unfortunately.
Yep, threads on the outlet (DIN connection) is what failed the go, no go test and like I said initially, very rarely used and when I did, I only ever used used hand pressure to attach the whip. I can't for the life of me understand how these threads could be damaged so easily given the light use. That's where my suspicions started to creep in.. My 12Lt Faber is older and was purchased secondhand, so I expect that will be a definite fail but I'll see when the time comes which isn't too long away.
Registered User
I wouldn't like to say...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote