Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
24 August 2010
20:5767075 The above leaflet has been posted through a few letterboxes of business`s in Dover the last couple of days. I absolutely agree with certain business owner`s that it`s written in a most intimidating way, and employing the old `scare tactics`. Note the headline, in other words, if you don`t show this amateurish label, you don`t care about your customer`s. What a load of rubbish! On about protecting your worker`s, the health and safety executive wanting to see your paperwork if there`s an incident as well as your insurer`s. I`m told there`s some sort of government grant involved in all this, together with employing newly qualified electrician`s. Anyway, another bit of scaremongering, similar to the water and sewerage companies about fractured pipes in your lawn, and £900 or more you could pay for digging out and replacing etc. The whole stinking lot is just a legalised version of the gangster protection racket`s of the 1930s. Any further info on above?
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,701
24 August 2010
21:4367084The "amateurish" label is a standard PAT test label - we have them stuck on all our kit at work and we have PAT testing done once a year by our regular electrical contractor in order that we comply with the relevant legislation.
Having said that the leaflet is outrageous and ought to be brought to the attention of the local trading standards office and HSE.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
24 August 2010
22:2867099Thanks Ross. We have those little labels on all electrical items on the railway, and I`m very familiar with them. I was actually referring to the leaflet as amateurish, but I don`t think I made myself clear enough at the top.
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
25 August 2010
00:0167112PAT testing is a farce anyway. If I'm not mistaken, just a look at something can be good enough to get the necessary sticker. Nannyism gone mad again.
Terry Nunn
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,305
25 August 2010
06:5167118"PAT Testing" winds me up anyway, just like "PIN Number".
Terry
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
25 August 2010
07:0167119Irrespective of whether the poster is amateurish or not, if there is a problem with any electrical appliance in the work-place and damage is caused - like a fire etc. the Health and Safety Executive as well as the Insurance company will want to see the PAT test cetrificate.
Many businesses are complacent about such things (a bit like PRS, which to me is a rip-off, but has much less impact on your livelihood), mostly I guess because they feel it will never happen to them - well it can and it does - to many businesses and then their insurance company won't pay out.
Whether they go with this company or not, they really ought to get their electrical appliances checked and certified.
Being shocked before an incident, is far better than to be shocked after one.
Roger
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
25 August 2010
07:2667121While I generally agree with Roger the regulations are over the top though.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,835
25 August 2010
08:1067125We put ours straight in the bin like all the other junk mail we get.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
27 August 2010
19:2567458I know exactly what you mean above Roger, but how many homes, (and there`s a hell of alot more than business`s), have their electrical appliances checked once a year, and have those little stickers on to show that the householder`s care about their family? Why just business`s? It looks really daft when an electrician comes round to our workplaces, fiddling with a kettle, microwave or whatever, then saying it`s safe with a sticker for another year, then we go home to our similar appliances that we`ve been using for the last five years or more, no sticker`s! Or is it all to do with the fear of employee sueing employer in an incident?
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
Guest 693- Registered: 12 Nov 2009
- Posts: 1,266
27 August 2010
20:0067472No Colin, it's all designed to keep business expenses up and keep someone in a job when it's a pointless waste of time and money. As your title so accurately says, it's scare monger tactics.
True friends stab you in the front.
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
27 August 2010
20:5467496Sorry to disagree with all you folks who think it's scaremongering and unnecessary but it's a sensible scheme and a legal requirement for employers. It also applies to electrical equipment that employees might bring in to work like radios.
I ran a laboratory at the Univ of Kent with over 100 electrical items in my lab (and some of them were scary). We had our appliances tested at least every year (as was any equipment from photocopiers to bedside lamps) and up to 5% failed due to wear and tear, and even some brand new items failed. On one occassion a visiting maintenance engineer got electrocuted because of faulty equipment and his company, not the university, were prosecuted for not providing a safe working environment.
I also play in a band and some venues insist that electrical items are delivered early in the day so their engineers can test them - it's not uncommon for musicians to get a shock from faulty gear. Third party insurance is required by most venues and is invalidated if just one piece of equipment has an out of date test.
I do agree though that having someone fiddle around and then put a sticker on is pointless - the best way is to plug the gear into an automatic tester which then issues a barcoded sticker which is used to identify both the tester and the gear at the next test (the green ones can be bought and stuck on by anyone without a test being done). The only items that should have a visual inspection are computers and the like, on the other hand equipment that is used in hostile environments like building sites should be tested more often - there are no hard and fast rules but an employer might be required to prove in court that they had taken reasonable steps if an injury or fatality occurred.
If you run a business with even one employee or where you have public on the premises, get your equipment tested but use a qualified person, you might regret it if you don't.
http://www.pat-testing.info/index.htmhoward mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
27 August 2010
21:0667497thanks for that ray, interesting to read the alternative view.
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
27 August 2010
21:1467500Thanks Ray, and yes we know it`s a legal requirement for employer`s. I can`t comment on your scary 5% out of a 100, as I don`t know how violently they were tested etc. Throughout my life, and my various family member`s lives, none of us have ever been electrocuted, through the thousand`s of appliances we`ve ever been in contact with. I`m never one for survey`s showed this that and the other I`m afraid, but having said that, if you had one hundred items which showed a 5% failure rate, that is bad, so why hasn`t the government or the health and safety executive or whoever acted on those figure`s, and made it compulsory for all domestic appliances in the home to be tested annually and stickered, not just business`s?
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
27 August 2010
21:2267505Colin, just you wait!!
I guess my 5% was high due to the equipment being a bit more heavy duty than the average home appliance, and often left on 24hrs all year. I'm also just dragging up from memory that one of the old wooden buildings I worked in at Pfizer got burned down when a fridge caught fire overnight due to an accumulation of dust in the works over many years - after that the maintenance staff hoovered behind and under each fridge annually.
27 August 2010
22:2167521At the end of the day, PAT testing is just another wheeze on the road to being a risk averse society, mainly driven by the ambulance chasers and insurance companies. The beurocracy required to maintain and monitor this process probably far outweighs any benefit. In fact it will be interesting to see if there is any documentd evidence in relation to the cost benefit analysis, rather than the "one life is woth more than all the money" platitude. I'll see what I can find and report back.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
27 August 2010
22:2367524right again sid will put the kettle on nowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
28 August 2010
06:3067551Thank you Ray - a good post.
I know that Mrs. Hopkins and she has been on a course to learn how to PAT test and invested in the testing machines, so she is qualified.
The main question is not whether it's a stupid law or not, or whether it's just another burden on small (and large) businesses or not (which I guess it could be classed as) but it is the law and if it affects your business and insurance, then surely it is better to comply BEFORE a problem, than face the financial consequences afterwards - isn't it ?
Roger
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,888
28 August 2010
08:2167572Testing is probably more useful in business than the home, and with some companies cutting corners and not checking can create risk.
Maybe it has gone a bit overboard, but there is a place for testing
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
28 August 2010
08:2367574So, does that mean Mrs Hopkins is now a fully trained and qualified electrician?
Please don't tell me anyone can be qualified as long as they've been on the course.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,888
28 August 2010
08:3367582SID
Alot is common sense, this was a wayof reducing risk
Colin will know from his railweay days how little electrical equipment got checked in offices until this legislation came out, and the dangerous state of some of the appliances.
So there is a need
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
