Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Gordon Hartley
A recent 18001 auditor stated that sack truck/trolleys were the same as lifting equipment and as such came under Loler. He suggested that these should be tested and certified in the same way as lifting equipment.
Is this right? as the regulations are not specific.
Thanks for any input.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Chris Pope
Nonsense
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Paul Leadbetter
He'll be telling you a crowbar is lifting equipment, next!
A sack truck is work equipment but not lifting equipment.
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Leganza
Hi,
Are you sure your auditor did specifically refer to 'sack trucks and trolleys' is it possible that what he was making reference to was e.g. An elevating pallet barrow and or a pedestrian elevating trolley ?
May I suggest that the reference he made needs to be carefully checked and considered against the specific items of work equipment in use which in turn could have a significant bearing on whether such equipment might fall within the scope of LOLER.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By bigwhistle
Straight fron the horses mouth
"lifting equipment" means work equipment for lifting or lowering loads and includes its attachments used for anchoring, fixing or supporting it;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Gordon
I think
1) If this is an auditor from a 3rd party certification body you need to enter a discussion with them concerning the auditors abilities in this area.
2) As with many people there seems to be a lack of understanding, on the part of this auditor, concerning work equipment to move loads and that to lift loads. The latter are under LOLER as most of us know - there are some oddities but sack barrows are not among them.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Joseph Bryce
I would imagine its correct to say that although the subject matter isn't covered by LOLER, there is still a requirement for certification of SWL, identification of SWL and regular checks to ensure they are still of safe sound condition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Totally agree Joseph BUT the auditor ought to be precise and not refer to one if he/she means the other.
My opening remark suggests that there are issues, and I think serious ones, in play here -and Gordon now needs to talk frankly to the auditing body concerned.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By stephencarey
Interesting question. We have in the last week had the same discussion regarding a small pallet truck which lifts approx 2 inches. The insurance company arrived on site for their annual audit and when asked were not concerned that it had not been examined no swl attached and there was not an issue UNTIL Some one asked the question what would happen if there was a claim?
Immediate response was you must obtain the relevant documentation.
The final answer from the insurance company was any appliance that lifts a load will come within the LOLER regulations.
I would suggest that the way forward is to ask your insurance company if you are unsure on these items to make sure you are covered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.