Rank: Super forum user 
|
We have recently had our passenger lift serviced which is generally used for x1 disabled person x2 a week and more in the main shifting furniture from one floor to another. As a result of the service we have received the following:
Recommended Works:
DDA 2004
Alarm
Auto Dial
To provide direct communication in the event of the lift alarm push being pressed, we are
able to offer an automatic dialing system with a choice of three telephone numbers which
is activated on the pressing of the alarm push and offers passengers direct communication
with either the lift company, the emergency services or an internal number. All works will
be included except the provision and maintenance of a direct dedicated phone line in the
machine room which is the responsibility of the customer.
Our costs to undertake this work will be £ 1080.00 excluding VAT
Safety Edges on Doors
The existing safety edges require replacement. At present the doors require positive
contact before re-opening. This can be very disturbing for elderly and disabled users. We
recommend the fitting of modern, electronic safety edges designed to sense obstructions
and re-open the door prior to contact, ensuring optimum passenger protection and safe
operation of the lift door system.
Our costs to undertake this work will be £ 900.00 excluding VAT
Question 1: How much is there of a need to install these updates - any legislation that requires it bearing in mind the very limited usage the lift receives by humans?
Question 2: Being aware of The Health & Safety at Work Act 1974, PUWER (Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations) 1998, LOLER (Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998, Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 and the Machinery Regulations, (as provided as part of this service report) does anyone have an electronic copy of BS 7255 Safe Working on Lifts, which I could view please to determine whether the above MUST be installed or with continued servicing we could continue the current statues quo?
Thanks for any feedback and enlightenment.
Badger
Question 2:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest 
|
Barrie, these are only recommendations from a lift company that serviced your lift, its clear they are after some extras from you.
As long as the lift alarm works and is audible and the last person in the building at night doesn't use the lift there is no need for an auto dial system.
There are safety edges on the doors already that reopen the doors on contact, unless the doors are slamming into people then there is no requirement to replace that system.
Your lift should be inspected annually by an insurance company if they are happy with your lift which they must be then politely say thank you but no thank you to the company concerned and look for a new lift company to service your lift.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sean
In general I agree with your comments but this lift is lifting people so its LOLAR examinations - which I assume is what you are alluding to- should be 6 monthly and the inspection should be by a competent person. Yes often the insurance company will insist they do this as part of the insurance requirements buts its nor an actual legal requirement that the insurance co does it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Brian, I was a lift engineer for many many years, when a passenger lift, goods lift, dumb waiter etc.. etc... Get installed they are inspected by an insurance company inspector or a sub contractor appointed by the insurance company before they are allowed to go in service, they are then checked annually by the same insurance company or agent appointed by the insurance to ensure safety.
The company that install the lift will normally undertake a service on a quarterly basis for a number of years and then it is up to the owner of the property as to which company he wishes to use for servicing after that.
Barrie said that the recommendations came from the company doing the servicing, the systems on the lift are adequate for the lift so therefore there is no need to take their advice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sean /Brian , thanks both for your replys. Our lift is serviced 4x a year and has the 'old type' door sensors, plus old ding-a-ling alarm bell, so as Sean indicates they are after extra work from us, which confirms my thoughts.
Thanks again.
Badger
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi Barrie
Sent you a PM
Alan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
They were wrong about the DDA regs so U must then question what else were they wrong about
and the law quoted 'The Health & Safety at Work Act 1974' also does not exist nor has it ever existed in the UK,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sean
As to doing the works I agree totally with you. As to your comments about being a lift engineer what you are talking about is a contractual arrangement between an insurance company and their client and not a legal requirement of LOLAR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Barrie,
Each of the recommendations of the contractor is a subject for risk assessment. (Excepting if the lift was installed post July 1999, which seems unlikely if it doesn't already have an autodialer, in which case the autodialer may be mandatory under the Lifts Regulations).
A requirement, or otherwise, for an autodialer is dependent upon the provisions made for persons trapped within the lift to raise the alarm and for rescue. A general requirement for such a provision would be implied in the RA required under the Management Regs. However, this provision need not be an autodialer. The pertinent question appears to be; is adequate provision made for a person trapped within the lift car to raise the alarm and receive response/rescue? If the disabled person is reliant upon the lift for access and egress, then this provision should be in place at all times when the disabled person is using the building.
The door detector is considered a specific DDA requirement under the lift design standard associated with DDA provisions. However, risk assessment in relation to the actual use of the lift should apply. There is no specific statutory requirement.
The lift should be examined 6-monthly under LOLER. However, the LOLER examination should not be considered to be a complete assessment of the lift design or the suitability provisions made for raising alarm and rescue in case of passenger entrapment, or to be an assessment of compliance with DDA requirements. These are not are not specific requirements of the examination under LOLER and, whilst an inspector may or may not comment on these, they remain the responsibility of the employer.
BS7255 doesn't assist in relation to these matters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
CJC
as given earlier ... 'Our lift is serviced 4x a year and has the 'old type' door sensors, plus old ding-a-ling alarm bell', plus a live risk assmt whist conducted at the east mids distrct meeting: additional work not reqd, write up risk assmt and source evac training. Job done.
Badger
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Let us be totally clear there are currently NO requirements under DDA2004 because it has been REPEALED. It is now under Equality Act 2010 so all reference to these are wrong. Not just the Lift Co are out of date. Having said that the standard to be achieved under EA is implicitly higher than DDA because of the definition of Indirect Discrimination. If the adverse effect of a decision/ policy/action etc on a disabled person is significantly greater than for an able person then it may be indirect discrimination. The engineer is offering goood advice but wrongly supported.
The same arguments are the same for the autodialer as the doorstop although the autodialer is probably more important if one is to make choices especially with such minimal costs. The lift would then meet much of current new installation standard.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Barrie
I am firing very much from the hip before nipping out to lunch, and I (obviously) aren‘t at work and have the records or correspondence to hand.
However, we has a similar experience some years ago where our lift company were making numerous recommendations, for which they would of course carry out the subsequent works. Nearly every time they seemed to be adding additional recommendations to an ever increasing list of jobs and ever increasing costs. So, I sat down with the facilities manager and we dug a little deeper, looked at the industry guidance and even used an dependant lift engineer to comment.
I think it would be fair to say that the company we were using were engaged in a little bit of ’sharp practice’ for the purposes of generating work/income. When we subsequently sat down with them and ’challenged’ their frequency of visits, various recommendations etc, they were, to say the least, rather ’sheepish’. I can say that coming out of the other end of that, we had significantly reduced our costs.
I get the sneaky feeling that similar practices might be relatively widespread within the industry, in the same way as the fire safety industry has in the past recommended the proliferation of fire extinguishers. It generates Sales and repeat business.
So, I don't know whether they are offering 'good' advice or not, and Bob may be on the right track, but my previous experience of this suggests that SOME recommendations may not be strictly necessary and might be more geared towards income generation.
It's a jungle out there!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.