Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Railwaybuff2  
#1 Posted : 11 October 2011 21:50:35(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Railwaybuff2

Hi All,

I am pondering over a matter related to product safety and product liability. I would very much appreciate your views and guidance.

I have identified a two tier bicycle rack system that I would like to install for public use. The system appears to be well-constructed and over-engineered. It was first manufactured 15 years ago and the distributer claims there have been no accidents/incidents in using the product. It is manufactured in the EU.

Whilst I am confident in the safety of the construction, the distributer explains that the product has not been subject to any form of safety accreditation or stress testing; there is no information confirming the load capacity of the unit and they are unable to provide information on the quality/suitability of the weld in the supporting columns.

Can you advise on what safety accreditation/testing such a product might apply –if any? Any further comments are welcome. Meanwhile, I am reviewing ‘The General Product Safety Regulations 2005’ but it’s an unwieldy piece of legislation, the answers don’t come easily and I am minded to seek the guidance of my piers on a matter that I am not particularly familiar with. Your help is much appreciated.

Regards,

*The system in brief;
1. It is a two tier system, one rack is stationed at head height above the lower tier.
2. It accommodates 20-30 bicycles, split evenly between the two tiers –when full the loading on the upper rack is significant.
3. Two supporting columns at either end are a steel fabrication, welded midway up and immediately below the point at which the column forks to support a canopy at two points.
David Bannister  
#2 Posted : 12 October 2011 12:17:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
David Bannister

Hi RWB2, my first thought is whether the distributor is actually the manufacturer. If so then I am very surprised that this product has apparently been thrown together with no formal consideration of stability etc.

I suggest that it is more likely that the manufacturer has the information you (rightly) seek but the distributor does not have it immediately to hand and the sales person is too idle to seek it out.

As one who undertakes product safety/liability investigations on behalf of major insurers I would be very concerned if my principals were providing product liability cover for these products with no evidence of good design and construction.
Railwaybuff2  
#3 Posted : 12 October 2011 14:33:00(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Railwaybuff2

Thank you 'stuff4blokes'.

The distributor is not the manufacturer -there may be a language barrier here but I'll make equiries as you've suggested.

Your other points are persuasive.

Is there concensus out there?
CE Marking has been suggested -any thoughts?
The General Product Safety Regulations 2005 -am I on the right page regarding the legislation?

Still researching.

Many thanks,
HSSnail  
#4 Posted : 12 October 2011 14:46:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
HSSnail

railway

You are correct about the General Product Safety Regulations in saying they are not the most user friendly of regulations. I attended a training course on these a few years ago now so let me give you a very simplistic overview of the regulations as I remember them. Basically these regulations are more usually used by trading standards to get consumer products that are found to be unsafe withdraw. However the HSE and LA may be responsible for enforcing them in certain situations. Where equipment is provided for use by employees then the equipment must meet Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER). Where the equipment is provided for use by none employees then PUWER does not apply but the general Product Safety Regulations will. It sound as if the equipment you are dealing with would fall into that category. If you are familiar with PUWER and apply the same principles to this equipment then you will probably be OK under the General Product Safety Regulations. Let me say again that this is not a comprehensive guide gust a simplistic summary of the requirements.
SimonL  
#5 Posted : 13 October 2011 16:08:40(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
SimonL

Hi, the GPSD is nice and vague and in a nutshell says that you cannot sell dangerous products, but does in general only deals with domestic products. In terms of your needs, the product may have to comply with a particular standard - I've done a quick search but couldn't find anything relevant, but the world of standards is far from being straightforward.
If the rack has a CE mark then you should be able to request a certificate of compliance from the manufacturer - this will tell you what standards it was tested to (if any). You would then need to look at the standard itself - strict copyrights exist on all standards and they would not be able to send you a copy.
I wouldn't bother with distributors etc as in my experience they won't know what you are talking about.
Regards
Simon
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.