Rank: Forum user
|
Sorry if this has been asked before, but am after some information, if possible......
We already have quite a large commitment to statutory inspections and preventative maintenance in place. As part of this, our loose lifting equipment (eg ropes, slings etc) is currently inspected every 6 months by a competent, third party sub-contractor, as per LOLER requirements. Thus, there are two inspections per year, plus annual maintenance by another sub-contractor!
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem as though we have been conducting regular inspections by the insurance company (eg Royal Sun Alliance, Allianz etc). Can anyone point me in the right direction of whether this is an absolute requirement, over and above LOLER, or if it's a good practice?
Thanks for any help with this.
Pete
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Our insurers (Allianz) do all our LOLER inspections for us. I work for a large global organisation. So why dont you consider that route?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I take it you refer to the requirement for thorough examination (and as appropriate, test) by competent persons.
Not to be confused with user inspections, maintenance, etc.
There is an absolute requirement under LOLER, but there is also considerable scope as to what constitutes a 'competent person' for that purpose.
There is no absolute legal requirement to engage the insurer's specialist engineers or other third party, and this is particularly relevant to simpler items such as slings, ropes, shackles etc. PROVIDED the person conducting the thorough examination has sufficient competence AND autonomy in decision making.
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Another confusion here is the term 'Insurance Inspections' - whilst a number of the large insurers do offer examination services as required under LOLER it is not the insurers that drive this it is the LOLER regs., hence a thorough examination of the equipment as required by the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations by a Competent Person (sorry if that is a bit pedantic!).
There are a number of independent companies that carry out thorough examinations, some of these working under the instruction of insurance companies or directly with duty holders.
It would be correct to say that if the 'duty holder' did not have his equipment thoroughly examined he may well be un-insured!
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
It does not have to be an Insurance company. Any "competent person" can do it, but the insurance co will often carry this out to assist clients and maybe make some money. Otherwise you will be doubling up on the statutory examinations.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Back in the mid 19th Century, when the first insurance companies offered boiler explosion cover it was subject to them carrying out inspections to make sure the boilers were safe.
Although inspection wasn't a statutory requirement until the 1901 Factories and Workshops Act, as the engineering insurers' had the expertise, this service continued to be offered by them and has since been extended to inspections and thorough examinations under LOLER and PUWER etc.
Just a bit of history as a lot of people don't understand why insurers are involved in inspection services.
|
|
|
|
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.