> He hasn't "permanently deprived" them of anything they were interested in keeping
Yes he has. He removed the high-value resaleable parts. Had those parts made it to the recycler, the Council in question would have received part of the sale price for them.
> he was basically taking rubbish out of a bin.
No. He was taking parts from a pile marked "for disposal". "Disposal" does not mean land-fill...
> If he'd waited until the kit was abandoned in a skip to be taken away and then come back later in an
> unofficial capacity to take it, is that still a problem?
Potentially, yes.
Throwing something in a skip does *not* mean you have relinquished ownership of it. Taking anything out of someone's rubbish without prior consent is still theft. Note, however, that such consent is generally very easy to obtain if you actually ask...
> And why couldn't he have got permission?
Why indeed?
> The council obviously disposed of it, no matter what value was in it
Yes, but "disposed of" does not mean "gave away"...
> Why can't you just say "It's in the bin, I consider it rubbish and I will concede all rights to it
You can. The Council did not.
> It seems there's just too much riding on saying that what he did was wrong
Not at all. what he did was Theft. There is no question.
The annoyance is that he could probably have done something very similar to what he did, but perfectly legitimately. But he didn't.
Vic.