Rank: Super forum user 
|
Does anyone have any information of how often a manual pallet truck should be inspected?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I've seen lots of topics around as to whether pallet rucks are lifting equipment so would fall under LOLER and need yearly insurance inspection. Or whether it is just work equipment as it's principle design is to move an object as opposed to lifting in which case it would be down to PUWER.
Example often used is a barbers adjustable chair (or even office chair) it's principle use is as a chair the fact that it is designed to raise or lower someone doesn't mean it falls under LOLER
so you need to decide if you think it falls under LOLER first
Phil
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The company use them to move boxes of labels from one department to another. My initial thoughts were going down the PUWER route but then again, the pallet trucks need to lift the equipment off the ground and could have hydraulic failure.
I can't decide...(but thanks for your help)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
http://www.hse.gov.uk/lau/lacs/90-4.htm14 L113 para 29 includes examples of machinery, eg the roll hoisting mechanism on a paper making machine, which are now covered by LOLER, as is the paper lifting mechanism on a photocopier. However, the measures that need to be taken under LOLER will depend upon the 'risk'. While LOLER applies to most work equipment used for lifting, in practice the risk assessment may result in there being few (if any) measures necessary to comply with the Regulations. Examples include a pallet truck (which raises the load a small distance) and small storage and retrieval systems with trays on a continuous chain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I would say given the fact a pallet truck on lifts the load a few inches there is little risk to the user as they should have no need to place body parts under the forks. also if the hydraulic cylinder is at fault it will fail to lift the load initially or continuously keep lowering which should indicate to the user there is a fault.
proper training is just as important to ensure they are not overloaded or generally abused by the operators.
Phil
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The risk associated with failure of equipment is really the deciding factor on this one.
We treat our trucks under PUWER, so have them all serviced annually and pre use checks in-house.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
guru wrote:The risk associated with failure of equipment is really the deciding factor on this one.
We treat our trucks under PUWER, so have them all serviced annually and pre use checks in-house. Ditto. On the basis that pump trucks only lift to gain ground clearence as opposed to achieving a different height.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Great stuff. Thanks for your assisstance chaps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
This is interesting...... I asked our FLT guy about where we stood with our pump truck and he claimed it needed a LOLER TE (12 months). No doubt this was to sell us another service. The general consensus here seems to be covered under PUWER. Has anyone ever heard of any case law relating to this? I doubt there are many RIDDOR incidents or accident investigations relating to pump trucks..... be interesting to find out though!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I found this from the FLT Association's FAQ on thorough examination of hand pallet trucks... Q: We have some hand-pallet trucks. This cant apply to them - can it? Hand pallet trucks and low lift trucks (i.e. non-stacking powered trucks with forks or a load platform that lifts up to 500mm from the ground, including those with an operator platform that elevates up to 900mm from the ground) do not require Thorough Examination. However, in order to comply with PUWER 98, these types of equipment still require a formal safety inspection at least once per year. The results of such inspections should be recorded and records retained for future reference. There is no set format for such records and the standard inspection sheet used by a fork truck maintenance company should be quite adequate. It would not be wrong to use a Report of Thorough Examination if nothing else suitable was available. http://www.fork-truck.org.uk/examination-faq
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.