Hi Paul

Not ware of any requirement restricting use of the same person to perform both routine maintenance/sevicing and also LOLER thorough examinations.
However in my experience it normal for the competent person carrying out a thorough examination to be employed by a separate company, e.g. a third party examining company.

If you are using an in house person to carry out thorough examinations, then you must (a) ensure that he/she is competent and (b) ensure that they are able to act with the necessary degree of impartiality and independence.

The only problem you could have if it is the same external company/person performing both the inspection and routine maintenance/servicing and also repair is that jobs can tend to escalate slightly as the more faults they find the more work they get (or perhaps I’m just being a little cynical).

Steve

Morning Paul,

Under LOLER as a piece of legislation it's the requirement of competence that is the driving factor when considering thorough examination or maintenance.

However, I get the feeling that you may be alluding to tail-lifts, or bin lifters, or fork trucks....... WISH recommends that bin lifters are examined by a third party. Indeed the marine industry also lean heavily towards third party provision.

If it were me I would ensure that I saw examples of thorough examination reports detailing any defects found during the examination, the standards used to do the examination (REMEMBER LOLER is not the standard for examination it is the framework legislation for the supply of lifting equipment or the conducting of lifting operations) simply saying LOLER 1998 on the report pertains to the report itself not the equipment that is the subject matter of the report - the equipment is covered by manufacture standards giving materials, dimensions, test methods etc. etc.

Then I would ensure that I was happy to accept that persons competence and integrity to conduct the works and report their findings.

If I was not I would look elsewhere.

Yours aye

Db

Ps you should also get a report for equipment that has failed for you to retain - you should retain it for min 3 years ...... just in case!

Also to note under PUWER regs its advised that a weekly inspection should be carried out and recorded on items used ie lifting accessories and equipment