PAT Testing

[Pete.]

The advice for unsafe items was always remove the plug... its the only way someone has to do something to put it back into use.

Yes they have to plug it back in.

If you cut the plug off all you're doing is adding a further point of failure by risking having a clueless person try to re-fit the plug using a butter knife as a screwdriver - or even worse, splicing another lead onto the cut-off one with sellotape, or even worse again stripping the wires back and jamming them into the sockets. This is the very reason the law was changed a while back to require all appliances to be sold new with the plug fitted - to prevent badly fitted plugs being an electrical/fire hazard.

If it's a question of liability, someone has tasked the tester to do the work of TESTING. Did the schoolkid or OAP ask for their gear to be tested? No, the school or care home did. So you do your test, isolate and mark faulty equipment and report the findings to them. The responsibility now lies with them to ensure the equipment is not put back into use, not the tester. it's a portable appliance TEST, not a TEST AND DESTROY. You got no right to chop up people's gear.

 

[mike os]

If that's all why bother?

 

[brightspark]

you have no right to bring faulty personal gear in to the workplace untested endangering other people. specially when its getting tested free and the parents are either stupid or too lazy to hand it in . insurance companys will not cover without the proper paperwork

 

[Pete.]

you have no right to bring faulty personal gear in to the workplace untested endangering other people. specially when its getting tested free and the parents are either stupid or too lazy to hand it in . insurance companys will not cover without the proper paperwork

I won't argue with that, in fact I agree with it. Doesn't turn a tester into and enforcement agent though.

 

[Pete.]

If that's all why bother?

Why bother what? Testing? Obviously testing is done so that faults are identified by a competent person. Completely sensible and completely right that it should be a requirement.

Testing is not the same as enforcement though. A tester's job is to test and report findings, if necessary isolate - nothing more.

A person's property is that person's property. You got no right to destroy it or any part of it.

 

[eLuSiVeMiTe]

Few years back I was fitting bedroom furniture for Hammond's
Regional manager came around and asked it all my tools were pat tested.
Saw my 110vbox and said oh it doesn't matter.? Not sure why he would think that

My tools are checked by myself anyway and repaired as needed

Pat tester cut any of my leads off he would be getting a bill for repairs

 

[dannyp]

i dont think anything has ever been tested at work, i think the only pat testign thats ever been done is a good wack wheneve things dont work but thats farmers

 

[mtt.tr]

We really are a nation against health and safety.

Find a pat tester get to know them and you'll have no trouble getting bits done as you need it doing.


You could do the course its very easy but after you factor in tester and insurance its not really worth the bother.

 

[Turbo]

This sort of thing drives me mad and goes against the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989, It needs to be based on Risk, not a calendar date.
The number of places that are leaving themselves wide open for prosecution in the event of an accident or death from a piece of electrical equipment.
All they have is the list of equipment with the number and the log to say its all tested once a year, yet not a single risk assessment of how the equipment is used or maintained throughout the year.
How can the microwave that sits on the kitchen worktop from one year to the next and never moves, need the same inspection and testing routine as the extension leads that are used every day and shut indoors and driven over? Especially when the record shows that each year they fail and require replacement or repair. How long have they been in that condition?

https://www.hse.gov.uk/pUbns/priced/hsr25.pdf
https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/hsg107.pdf

A few of the more responsible members (including me) recently did a supervisors course that included doing risk assessments and checking equipment was fit for use. PAT testing was discussed & the tutor advised us that vulnerable items like extension leads need to checked more often, depending on use.

As for microwaves, the company they use charges £20 each to test them. We had one in the kitchen plus 2 broken ones that were left for scrap, he managed to pass all 3 despite 2 of them not working!

 

[Pete.]

This is a contentious issue and its down to small print unfortunately.

All schools have contracts now and I have read a couple, they state the tester has to cut the cable ends off to prevent it being used, however, cut the plug off which connects to the device and you can still plug it into the mains plug and have a live cable, cut both ends off and it cannot be connected to the device or the live mains electricity, so basically it is a combination of absolving themselves of liability and putting the liability onto the tester.

Schools have no right to require that, without a contract with the owner i.e. it's a (written) condition of bringing an item to site. If they have that, then fine.

Any tester that allows themselves to be contracted into anything more than test and report is stupid and should wire themselves to the mains. It's not your job - your job is to test and report, not take remedial action. As soon as you do that you're adopting a responsibility you didn't otherwise have.

The duty of care lies with the school. You report your findings to the school or employer and THEY must take action.

 

[mtt.tr]

Something must have been in air last night going by this thread and the hse one.

 

[northwest]

the only way to determine what is right is by a High Court Judge, this will set a legal precedent and everyone will know what they can do and cannot do

As you will be no doubt aware, a legal precedent is an expensive outcome and the presiding Judge will be sticking his neck on the block. Not many want that.

The duty of care lies with the school.

God_Forbid. From my observations of all large-(ish) institutions be they Public or Private, they try very hard to shift it onto some smaller less protected individual or smaller organisation. "Responsibility" always features large.

 

[Munkul]

Duty of care lies with the owner/operator. The school is accountable for removing dangerous items from service, they can delegate that responsibility onto the PAT tester if everyone agrees.
The PAT tester is not duty bound to destroy dangerous items, nor should they take it upon themselves without the owner/operator's consent.

Its same with lifting equipment. Surveyor inspects and condemns a sling, but the owner is responsible for chopping it in half and ensuring it can't be used.

 

[Munkul]

Right so then. Say I create a log of all equipment and carry out the PAT testing myself. What would be a good machine to go for?
Grinders, drills, lights, cables etc being the main items, all 110V. But also three phase welder?

Our electricians do it for our equipment on our site, but they won't touch 3 phase equipment. I can't remember if they said their tester didn't do 3 phase, or if its because they don't class 3 phase as portable... i dunno lol

 

[The_Yellow_Ardvark]

Our electricians do it for our equipment on our site, but they won't touch 3 phase equipment. I can't remember if they said their tester didn't do 3 phase, or if its because they don't class 3 phase as portable... i dunno lol

Yes it is.
If has a plug, it is subject to PAT regulations.

 

[cheb]

There's a similar thing with dive cylinders IME. You can be spoken to about the dangers in a manner so patronising that even a traffic cop with 30 years on the job would consider excessive.

 

[Cobbler]

There's a similar thing with dive cylinders IME. You can be spoken to about the dangers in a manner so patronising that even a traffic cop with 30 years on the job would consider excessive.

When I used to dive, if a cylinder failed test they used to drill a hole in it to stop it being filled. I think this practice was stopped though.

 

[cheb]

AFAIK yes. People who knew better would plug the hole with weld. IIRC the recommendation is now to cut them in two.

 

[earthman]

out of 1500 items tested at a school all passed apart from about 25 items. kettles water boilers extension leads and cleaners hoovers and polishers that was cuts in flexes and inner cores showing on plugs that had pulled out of the chord grips

That's interesting, now did any of those 25 items display a 'fail' on the machine before you spotted the cuts in the flexes etc?

 

[The_Yellow_Ardvark]

That's interesting, now did any of those 25 items display a 'fail' on the machine before you spotted the cuts in the flexes etc?

It wouldn't of done.
That's why the first stage is to a visual on each item. Before you plug it in to the machine.