Alleged illegal tanks sold by Add Helium-Heads up to any that may have purchased

[Bennno]

These clowns dont have either the facility or qualification
Specification of the purchaser? (the head dress shop I guess)
Good QA?
Made to their specification? (good enough I guess)
Does there own QA? (ROFL)

This is from the USA importer and supplier Add Helium his own words about a pressure vessel
he is importing from 2014, Im asking what the standard it is made to and your asking whats weird about it.
Go figure. Iain

Yes, the retailer might not know what he is talking about. They probably don't know what CE is or what ISO9001 is either. Many retailers don't know that.
What does this have to do with selling head scarfs?

On the AH website is says that the tanks aren't DOT tanks and they don't seem to claim CE either.

 

[Capt Jim Wyatt]

this should be either a Travis McGee or Doc Ford book.

Travis McGee for sure....

 

[The Chairman]

Travis McGee for sure....

Maybe Monty Python can make a movie out of it?

 

[Compressor]

Feel sad for people who purchased these tanks.

Happy New Year everyone.

 

[cool_hardware52]

I have no dog in this fight, none. I do no business with AH, and do not view AH as a competitor.

My general thoughts. RB divers (and all tech divers to some extent) are quite accustomed to employing equipment and technologies that are to borrow a phrase from medicine "off label" One could easily argue that if RB divers (and manufactures and resellers) were to maintain strict compliance with all regulations and manufacturers recommendations there would be nearly zero RB's available today for recreational divers. One need only look at the number of scuba tank valves that are recommended for 100% O2, or the prevalence of the "Cave fill" or the use of various CO2 absorbents. Many more examples are available.

I should note that I am not in a professional capacity recommending anybody violate manufacturers recommendations, industry standards, or government regulations, I am only noting that doing so is routine, and widely accepted in some parts of recreational diving.

There is one thing in the Original Post that if proven to be true is quite troubling.

Among a bunch of allegations in the court filing is that Sotis bought non DOT certified tanks and sold them, altering the tanks to appear DOT certified.

If this is indeed the case it suggests that a reseller was trying to deceive his customers, and quite possibly creating real hazards.

I sincerely hope this proven to be no more than a hollow, false allegation from a vengeful former business partner. Scuba, particularly technical diving has much to lose if these excesses are proven to have been SOP.

Tobin

 

[EricTheDood]

Among a bunch of allegations in the court filing is that Sotis bought non DOT certified tanks and sold them, altering the tanks to appear DOT certified.

That was not alleged.

Copy and pasted from the complaint:

Purchasing and selling non-DOT compliant scuba tanks and, subsequently, mislabeling the non-compliant scuba tanks to conceal their non-compliant nature;

Why not just tell it like it is? Embellishing a story doesn't help anybody on either side.

 

[EricTheDood]

I sincerely hope this proven to be no more than a hollow, false allegation from a vengeful former business partner.

Why hope for either side to win, without knowing any facts? The only thing we should hope for is that the truth comes out, regardless of how inconvenient that truth may be.

 

[The Chairman]

Among a bunch of allegations in the court filing is that Sotis bought non DOT certified tanks and sold them, altering the tanks to appear DOT certified.

That was not alleged.

Copy and pasted from the complaint:

Purchasing and selling non-DOT compliant scuba tanks and, subsequently, mislabeling the non-compliant scuba tanks to conceal their non-compliant nature;

Why not just tell it like it is? Embellishing a story doesn't help anybody on either side.

I don't see the difference between the two. To be very clear, I don't know what the facts are in this case either. I am interested in the outcome in the same way I'm interested in a wreck on the side of the road. It really won't affect me how it turns out. May the side with the stronger case win.

"Sotis bought non DOT certified tanks and sold them, "
is the same as
"Purchasing and selling non-DOT compliant scuba tanks"

"altering the tanks to appear DOT certified"
is the same as
"mislabeling the non-compliant scuba tanks to conceal their non-compliant nature"

I really don't have a dog in this fight either. I lost respect for Sotis a year ago when it became apparent he was attacking a good friend of mine for petty reasons. It appears he was doing the very same thing that caused him to create Add Helium. While I get your need to demand fairness, I don't see Chris' post as being substantially different than what you quoted. What am I missing?

Don't get me wrong. Whatever the outcome is, it certainly won't affect me one whit. May the man with the strongest case win!

 

[KevinNM]

I lost respect for Sotis a year ago when it became apparent he was attacking a good friend of mine for petty reasons. It appears he was doing the very same thing that caused him to create Add Helium.

So what is the whole backstory here anyhow?

 

[cool_hardware52]

Why hope for either side to win, without knowing any facts? The only thing we should hope for is that the truth comes out, regardless of how inconvenient that truth may be.

I don't need to know the facts to hope that no reseller, particularly one with the reputation and reach of AH has not been engaged in deception and illegal activities.

If this is the case there will be no winners, only a long list of losers, the divers that purchased the altered goods, and scuba as a sport. Scuba will suffer a black eye that not benefit the sport as a whole.

Tobin