I have a scenario, where the client is providing the equipment (hiring) the crew to build it and the operators to operate it at a multi contractor event. The equipment is being used to lower a "celebrity" from the roof to the stage as a grand entrance. Suitable risk assessments and method statements are in place and a number of contingency policies in the event of power failures, emergencies, evacuations etc. All equipment and inspection conforms with LOLER, PUWER etc A concise tool box talk has been devised for operators and "celeb" My client, has decided not to include the contingency policies or the tool box talk as that is an addmission to responsibilty, whereas, they feel the event organisor should assume responsibility. Any response would be most helpful Thanks

PS. Take That's lawyers are probably pursuing an action against someone for the consequences of equipment failure at the recent Manchester concert.

Thanks S4B Unfortunately, many aspects of a show are often last minute, although robbie the robots paralysis in Manchester, was unplanned, the robot had been included in the show right from the beginning. My main concern with the initial post was whether my client was responsible, either fully or in part for the safety of the "celeb" as they supplied, built and operated the lifting equipment. I take your point regarding lawyers etc, however in the real world, this is not always carried out. Thus it becomes one of the reasons I stay within this industry, with almost 20 years "Rockin' an Rollin' or is that proceeding without fear of slip or trip? it's my core knowledge area

S4B... As I suspected, in fact I refused to write any policy which absolved responsibility in any way (I may not have this client much longer) It's a fantastic area to be in, challenging, rewarding, diverse and a complete pleasure, and I want to keep it ALL to myself... as if! I am just one small cog in an ever expanding world.