Rank: New forum user
|
I work at an FE college with the usual mix of portable appliances ranging from fans and computors in theoffice through grinders and cutters in machine shops and a whole host of woodwork tools.
We Portable appliance test the whole lot annually and not as per the IEE code of practice: my boss arguing that the code is too onerous and is just good practice and if we fail to keep to that standard we could be liable for prosecution for failing to keep to our policy.
I feel that we could also be prosecuted for not following the guideance, although it is not issued by HSE and is not an ACOP.
Should something go wrong I also feel we could be sued/prosecuted for gross negligence manslaughter for not following the IEE code.
Does anybody have any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
You can't be prosecuted for not following the IET guidance, since it is not a legal requirement to comply with the guidance or even to PAT test anyway. If you fail to maintain electrical equipment in a safe state then you will be liable to prosecution, in which case you will have to prove what you had done to ensure the equipment was maintained in a safe condition. A PAT testing regime might be considered suitable evidence of your efforts.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi - as you've rightly said the IEE code is not law, however it is the industry acknowledged code and hence is the example of how to ensure that electrical items are safe. If you don't follow it you would need to prove that your own method and frequency was just as safe; which is pretty difficult to do if you're trying to prove your innocence in court BECAUSE of an incident. Do you back up your PAT testing regime with user checks etc?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
A single annual "PAT" check is worthless IMHO.
You are almost certainly "over testing" some kit and under inspecting other kit.
I suggest you move to a risk based regime centred on the IET CoP & the published HSE guidance.
There is no need to test everything annually and the IET CoP does not require this.
What is MUCH MORE IMPORTANT and almost always over looked is the use checks that form part of the IET CoP so if you are not doing those then you are not in compliance anyway!
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The thing I hate about PAT is the fact that people think if they do PAT they won't be prosecuted. That's not the case. The Regs esentially say you need to maintain equipment in good condition, not that you need to PAT, whihc just syays it was safe at the point in time. You need a range of measures depending on frequency and type of use as well as type of equipment. Some items need visual inspection as well / instead. PAT can be a real red herring if you're not careful.
So in essence. You are wrong and your boss is wrong too.
You'll be over testing some things (office equipment etc) and not visually checking other things that need it more often (grinders etc).
Th HSE do a great guidance doc on it. Go check their website.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The discussion about PAT has been flogged to death on this forum. The only thing that everyone will agree on is that they don’t agree.
I would advise you to read your insurance policy VERY carefully or contact your underwriter, specifically re: PAT. You MAY just see a requirement to undertake PAT annually as a minimum.
|
|
|
|
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.