have you got the ball's

[headgasket]

I have been thinking long and hard about legislation and have come to the conclusion, that I do don’t think it will happen. As with corgi gas engineers if an appliance is leaking the machine is declared dangerous, and cannot be used so good so far. Take two examples. Corner shop small upright chiller in his back room you have found a leak on the evap, you have two choices, top it up, or say sorry mate you will have to wait until I get a new part, no problem small bucks involved.
Food processing factory production stopping due to gas leak, will take 1000kg to get it going, you have 1km of pipe work the system holds 3500kg, and you cannot find the leak. What do you do big bucks involved, has any one the balls, that big to turn round and say sorry I can not recharge it until I find the leak.

Ps it would be nice long live the revolution.

Hi Brian is my grammar better ?.
:p

[chillin out]

The trouble with doing this is that there is always somebody else that will do the job.

Company 'A' goes to store 1 and refuses to charge as there is a leak.
Company 'B' goes to store 2 and refuses to charge as there is a leak.

All they do is go to each others jobs to get the cash.
A to 2 and B to 1

Nobody is going to turn down a fast buck.

Chillin:) :)

[NoNickName]

There will always be somebody with too much refrigerant to sell and too greed to be honest.
No, I will top it up and vaya con dios

[weeksy]

I've done it before:cool: .....Refused to top a system up despite huge pressure to do so from the customer....a leading semiconductor manufacturer no less.....but I just explained that what they were asking me to do was illegal & I was not prepared to do it.

I'm personally getting a bit sick & tired of hearing the old excuse "well, if we don't do it...someone else will"....
...Well, that someone else is breaking the law & could face a serious fine or in extreme cases, a spell at the pleasure of her majesty:eek:

I reckon its about time some of these cowboys were grassed up if they continue to blatantly pursue their illegal practices.......that should clear the way for us true porfessionals:)

[Brian_UK]

Hi Brian is my grammar better ?.
:pYeah, great, I can breath now :cool: ;)

[eggs]

I've done it before:cool: .....Refused to top a system up despite huge pressure to do so from the customer....a leading semiconductor manufacturer no less.....but I just explained that what they were asking me to do was illegal & I was not prepared to do it.

I'm personally getting a bit sick & tired of hearing the old excuse "well, if we don't do it...someone else will"....
...Well, that someone else is breaking the law & could face a serious fine or in extreme cases, a spell at the pleasure of her majesty:eek:

I reckon its about time some of these cowboys were grassed up if they continue to blatantly pursue their illegal practices.......that should clear the way for us true porfessionals:)

www.weekstechnic.com

Hello weeksy

Now then just a thought.
You spoke earlier about setting up on your own.
Would you still refuse, if your new company hadn't been paid any of your invoices for 3 months. Your rent was overdue, suppliers bills were mounting and your on stop everywhere, and you have no money left to pay your Lads next week.
You havn't paid your mortgage for two months and there is no food left in the cupboard for the kids.
This is the reality of setting up and running company.

If this were the predicament and the said company give you the going rate up front in cash.

"KERCHING" you would stuff the law.

Think long and hard before setting up on your own.

cheers

eggs

[US Iceman]

Food processing factory production stopping due to gas leak, will take 1000kg to get it going, you have 1km of pipe work the system holds 3500kg, and you cannot find the leak. What do you do big bucks involved, has any one the balls, that big to turn round and say sorry I can not recharge it until I find the leak

This raises an interesting predicament. I am not familiar with all the UK & EU regulations however...

If the regulations state you cannot add refrigerant until the leak has been corrected, then of course you have to repair the leak first.

If on the other hand the regulations allow you to add refrigerant to get the system back up and running AND THEN LOOK FOR THE LEAK, that is something different.

If no refrigerant is supposed to be added until the leak is repaired and someone does add refrigerant we have an issue of morals and scruples.


...but I just explained that what they were asking me to do was illegal & I was not prepared to do it

That is the correct answer based on my limited knowledge of the discussion. I think this is the correct and proper response.


There will always be somebody with too much refrigerant to sell and too greed to be honest.
No, I will top it up and vaya con dios

Without meaning offense this is exactly the root of the problem.

Perhaps Argus could provide an explanation of the requirements as they exist now. If pending legislation is under review perhaps you guys should start making phone calls and sending letters to the politicians. If you don't like the way it is now, it could get worse!

[Argus]

I'll have a go - but I emphasise that I'm not a lawyer.

As usual there?s more heat than light on this subject.

But, before we go any further, hats off to Weeksy for getting it right first time.
It strikes me that integrity is a bit thin on the ground in this thread and it seems that his area of business is more demanding of expertise and less tolerant of bodging a job and getting the cash.

Even so, it doesn?t matter whether it?s a small shop or a 3 mW chiller ? the legal duty of care regarding emission control of refrigerant is the same.

This applies to the UK where I live and the remaining 24 EU states. Give or take a few national laws the overall obligation is the same. The fact that some of the more advanced European countries manage to police it more effectively than others is not the point. The issue is, can we continue to be as profligate with emissions of industrial chemicals as we have been? The short answer is a resounding NO.

The UK is arguably one of the least regulated countries in this area. At present, (March 2006), there are no restrictions here regarding who can buy refrigerants or practice as an ?engineer?. This would explain the low esteem of the service side of the industry in many quarters.

However, that doesn?t mean that we don?t have the laws to prosecute. We do. They are largely ignored
unless there is a fatality or a high profile leak.

To start with, the oldest of the lot is the Environmental Protection Act, 1990. Its remit is wide ranging and covers every kind of waste from litter in the street to biological and radioactive hazards. Refrigerants are known to be harmful to the environment. (A known leak allowed to continue is classed as waste). It has been used, (not often) to prosecute. The most notorious was a couple of fitters in a garage about 10 years ago who vented a system to atmosphere. This act has largely been supplanted by the Hazardous Waste Regulations.
Section 33 says that it illegal to dispose of any substance that is harmful to humans or the environment.
Section 34 introduces the concept of ?duty of care?. This means that you have a legal responsibility to ensure that any disposal is done legally. Allowing a leak to go unrepaired contravenes this part as well as section 33.

Then you have the ODS Regulations, Concerned with CFCs and HCFCs.

The new F gas regulations expected later this year is especially concerned with preventing leakage and places the obligation for ensuring this is done on the operator of the equipment he must ensure that leaks are repaired:

In article 3 it says:


1. Operators of the following stationary applications: refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pump equipment, including their circuits, as well as fire protection systems, which contain fluorinated greenhouse gases listed in Annex I, shall, using all measures which are technically feasible and do not entail disproportionate cost:
(a) prevent leakage of these gases; and
(b) as soon as possible repair any detected leakage.

?As soon as possible? means right now, not when you feel like it.

Unfortunately it only applies to HFCs.

Finally last July 2005 all waste refrigerants, oils and lot of other commodities are now Hazardous Waste. The legal onus is also on the service company. In my opinion, this is the one where they will tighten up on.

Expect some exemplary prosecutions.

.
________
digital vaporizers (http://digitalvaporizers.info)

[US Iceman]

...places the obligation for ensuring this is done on the operator of the equipment he must ensure that leaks are repaired

We have something similar to this here in the US. Large companies have been forced to pay huge fines. It is also incumbent upon the service firms. Do not get caught! This does not mean do a better job of hiding...

Argus offered the language I suspected might be in the regulations:



(a) prevent leakage of these gases; and
(b) as soon as possible repair any detected leakage.

His other comment:

‘As soon as possible’ means right now, not when you feel like it.



'Duty of care’ and due diligence are similar. If it can be proved you did not exercise this you could find yourself on the wrong end of a very serious situation.

Negligence is the word that comes to mind.

"b" above provides an answer to the orginal post (barring any specific legal interpretations). Get the system back up and running, but also start looking for the leak immediately. An immediate repair could be considered 'duty of care'.

Again, consult a lawyer for an opinion.

[eggs]

But, before we go any further, hats off to Weeksy for getting it right first time.
It strikes me that integrity is a bit thin on the ground in this thread and it seems that his area of business is more demanding of expertise and less tolerant of bodging a job and getting the cash.
.

OUCHHHHHH!!!

I do do the right thing although i don't always agree with it, all i was refering to was weeksy's earlier thread regarding going it alone.

Fact, nobody gets anywere in business without being "a bit dodgy"
Unfortunatly you have to do some things in the begining to get "a foot in the door" unless of course you set up the easy way, ie steel your former employees customers.
But for those of us who start at the very bottom, you have to do what is needed at the time to get the client onside.

I know i am talking about 2 threads, but it is somthing weeksy needs to consider before going it alone.

cheers, and by the way good luck Weeksy if you do, do it.

eggs

[US Iceman]

...unless of course you set up the easy way, ie steal your former employees customers.

I would not recommend this approach as I'm sure you did not either.

Here in my area there is a Federal (meaning US government) case involving something very similar to this. I would hate to be the guys having to defend this prosecution or be a willing participant in the venture.

[Abe]

As a qualified engineer you are responsible for the work you do; not the company you work for! (YOU can be sued)

ie: If you turn off a distribution board to upgrade an MCB then YOU are responsible for every circuit on that board (kind of expensive if your company doesn't have the right insurance and something gets fried because it had a fault BEFORE you switched off!:eek:

I once refused to top up a system because the original cond unit was found to be in a roof space that was bricked up when the property was converted into flats. My boss came down to the job and said we had no choice but to top it up until we could fit a water cooled unit; it was not our fault, but the law is clear: It is illegal to top up a system that has a known leak. It was obvious this one had a leak but we couldn't find it and get to it. So my boss concluded we were not breaking the law!

Your thoughts on this and also on the fact that I carried out a direct order on the information given me by my employer as to the legal side of what I was instructed to do!



An employer is vicariously liable for negligent acts or omissions by his employee in the course of employment whether or not such act or omission was specifically authorised by the employer. To avoid vicarious liability, an employer must demonstrate either that the employee was not negligent in that the employee was reasonably careful or that the employee was acting in his own right rather than on the employer's business.