Ray I couldn't agree more! The number of times I have taken my laptop in to a client to demonstrate a piece of equipment only to have to stand around waiting for the electrician to come and test it, even though the previous client earlier that day had done just the same and affixed a sticker... Incidentally, one tested the laptop and ignored the skin measuring system as he didn't know what this was. Another wanted to PAT test a unit that was battery operated. Makes you think!!! On one occasion I had a colleague over from Sweden. His laptop had a continental plug of course, so we were using an adapter to fit this to a UK power socket. Because of this the electrician at one client refused to accept it. It took intervention from a senior manager to resolve this impasse! And we are the one complaining about unnecessary 'elf and safety'. Only the other day I had a phone call claiming that all my electrical equipment had to be PAT tested annually as this was a legal requirement. I wonder how many SMEs have fallen for this and spent money unnecessarily. Chris

Its a step in the right direction. Before I started in this current position the local electrician was PA Testing everything here- it needed to be done every year! So he said. He had been doing it for years- an average of 2100 items per year. There were test stickers on a fixed bench drill and grinding wheels. No one was checking what they actually tested. We now have our own tester and equipment and its all done on a risk basis. What worries me though is how much publicity this document will get and how SME's will get to know about it. On a slightly different topic- I had a fone call today telling me that my first aid boxes were now illegal and they could sell me some new ones so I was compliant! Andy

Andy perhaps he is right, how old are your first aid box contents, most stuff in them have a specific shelf life and do you undertake internal checks yourself to ensure they are up to date? I used to keep a supply of first aid material and check the boxes monthly to see what replenishment was needed (it was quite high really considering the number of accidents recorded in the accident book, but then blisters from badly fitting shoes means plaster being used for other than first aid).

Nonsense. Your statement isn't even correct becuase as well as some appliances needing less regular checks some would need more frequent than annual checks. Whilst the cost to businesses of blanket PAT irritates me, from a safety angle PAT doesn't even meet compliance with the Regs becuase all it does is say it was safe at thate point in time. People see the green sticker and assume it is safe. I hate those green stickers. So, actually the HSE don't like blanket PAT and then a lack of actual control meaning something has a little green sticker but the wires showing. Bob - I think BJC means that there are businesses phoning up and saying that you have to get European standard of first aid kits or you're not legally compliant. Which is of course a load of rubbish.

Agree with the comments regarding HSE and PAT. We conduct testing on a risk basis and have done for several years, time scale ranges from 3 monthly for extension leads upto 3 years for VDU,s PC,s etc, we also looked at the office layout and hard wired in the photo copier and shredder as these never moved. Members of staff using portable appliances are instructed to visually check the condition of the equipment and wire.

HSG236 (low risk premises) is reissued, but we still await the revised version of HSG107 to get the whole picture. I wholeheartedly agree with the OTT nature of PAT, particularly for Class 2, however I do urge some degree of caution. Many employers out there have little or no arrangements for formal visual exam or exam before use. Often, the 12 month PAT regime is the only mechanism for spotting potentially dangerous kit. Let's not lose sight of the more important formal and user visual requirements. I'm quite taken with the HSE's (?) new (?) strap-line: "Check the cable - not the label."

I thought the existing guidance HSE issued about PATesting (it been risk based not mandatory) had been around for years and years? What's new?

I actually hate PA testing. I have offered clients risk based solutions for a long time, but never been taken up on them. One client refused on the grounds that it would be too much for them to manage and an annual I&T for al was better for them. They had been doing this for years, primarily an office environment, but I still condemned about 6 out of say 80 items. Guess I'd better have a read of it! I suspect that it will reinforce my view that PA testing is not an annual event where a competent person undertakes a recorded I&T but is more of an ongoing process involving the users undertaking the user checks etc. as the IET CoP recommends, this also does not recomend annual tests on everything either, which seems to be conveniently ignored by the PAT companies!

As others have mentioned, if firms which do PA testing keep perpetuating the myth that everything and anything powered through a plug needs to be PA tested annually, no doubt to maintain their nice incomes, it seems unlikely that sensible advice from HSE and OS&H professionals will have much effect in changing the common misperception held by businesses and other organisations. Back in 1996 I revamped the electrical safety guidance for my employer's schools and, among other things, highlighted the fact that HSE at the time advised that annual testing of everything and anything wasn't necessary. Even so, over subsequent years it was frustrating to find that most of the schools preferred to keep wasting money on annual testing of all items, and couldn't be persuaded otherwise. Some of this was probably due to the influence of testing firms which gave mis-information during their approaches to the schools. Also, despite the financial savings to be made, perhaps it was just too much effort for school managements to think a bit more about what should be tested and at what intervals. Far easier to stick with annual testing, akin to having a vehicle MOT'ed. I sometimes wondered if most schools even looked at the lists of what was being checked and what faults if any were found and in what number. Also, I'm baffled about references to PA testing of laptops. Don't they all operate at harmless voltages i.e. 3 to 6 or so volts, supplied to their batteries or directly from mains-voltage transformers? Also, if the transformer casings and their 240v leads & plugs are visibly checked and found to be in good condition, is there any need for them to be PA tested? The same goes for plug-in transformers for devices like mobiles.

I'm still at a loss as to what actual "test" these modern PAT machines actually apply to a Class 2 appliance other than load testing. The older (lab use) test machines involved using a high voltage hand-held kV probe (along with rubber mats and other-hand -in-pocket approach) to the cable & appliance to check insulation integrity.

For balance, following my earlier post. I received another call from the same company yesterday and interestingly the call made no mention of legal requirements only that they wished to introduce their company to ours in relation to PA testing and the service they could offer us. Geoff

Probably not many Ray as they have an answer to this and will no doubt use the risk argument to convince customers that it is a legal requirement simply because most employers won't have read the guidance on PA testing, so what they don't know will cost them.

"simply because most employers won't have read the guidance on PA testing, so what they don't know will cost them." That is an interesting point, so how should the HSE/Government ensure that they get the message across. Should trading standards be used to counter the claims of the PAT companies?

The HSE have been saying for years that compliance with the EaW regs was being over-interpreted. It's not new. I have just found - whilst seriously decluttering - a bit of history: a bulletin from HSE dated Feb 1993, with two pages in old Courier typeface, explaining the requirements exactly as they have just been re-released. This information was also repeated occasionally since, going on memory. But it's not the HSE's job to tackle 'over-application' of legislation (they would have their work cut out with 'risk assessment' if that were the case). They are rightly more concerned about under-application, non-compliance as we call it. It's the safety practitioners job to advise on the right approach, surely.

Fair point. How many of us actually make a complaint (to the Company, to Trading Standards, or both)?