LOLER - New rope marking legislation?

[Lancstree]

I've had much to do with loler for quite a while now and I've just had a call from one of our arborists regarding a concern from a loler inspector about the rope markings.

 

The issue is that the loler inspector has said that legislation came in, in 2015 that ropes should be marked as static or dynamic. I'll get more information but he is asking for markings stating MDS or UIAA - Falls. Also a mention of sdc's dynamic?

 

Can anyone help clear this up? He is basically unwilling to categorize brand new ropes, from an arboricultural supplier, as climbing rope - therefore it would be 'not fit for purpose'.

 

Thanks in advance

[Johny Walker]

I've had much to do with loler for quite a while now and I've just had a call from one of our arborists regarding a concern from a loler inspector about the rope markings.

 

The issue is that the loler inspector has said that legislation came in, in 2015 that ropes should be marked as static or dynamic. I'll get more information but he is asking for markings stating MDS or UIAA - Falls. Also a mention of sdc's dynamic?

 

Can anyone help clear this up? He is basically unwilling to categorize brand new ropes, from an arboricultural supplier, as climbing rope - therefore it would be 'not fit for purpose'.

 

Thanks in advance

 

new lolar inspector required:biggrin:

[TIMON]

Hi. Do you mean MDS or MBS (min breaking strength) ?

 

I've never LOLERed dynamic rope for tree work as we generally use static type rope for "work positioning" applications.

 

Any climbing rope used in Arb must have a CE mark which shows it has been tested to European standards and usually has an EN 1891 (European Norm) type A rating which shows that it has a 22kn or above MBS and as such, when providing a LOLER certificate only needs to be classified as PPE.

 

This info is to the best of my knowledge/understanding and there are others on here with greater in depth knowledge.

 

It sounds like your LOLER guy might be referring to rock climbing or even IRATA gear.

[Lancstree]

Agreed we definetely ought to have a different loler inspector as this one is non-arb. He's from an insurance company and has no idea how our tree kit is used. We've tried to get an arb specific loler examiner but the insurance company insist they do our inspection.

 

It could be MBS the lad was telling me on the phone but I'm sure he said MDS. I'll clear that one up easily enough tomorrow.

 

I agree with everything said there just never heard of this as I've been out of arb for a little while and in a different line of work.

[TIMON]

Agreed we definetely ought to have a different loler inspector as this one is non-arb. He's from an insurance company and has no idea how our tree kit is used. We've tried to get an arb specific loler examiner but the insurance company insist they do our inspection.

 

It could be MBS the lad was telling me on the phone but I'm sure he said MDS. I'll clear that one up easily enough tomorrow.

 

I agree with everything said there just never heard of this as I've been out of arb for a little while and in a different line of work.

 

 

The ironic thing here is that having your climbing kit LOLERed by a non Arb inspector may mean that your insurance may be void in the event of a piece of kit failing due to his error.

 

The regs state that the kit should be inspected by someone with the relevant practical and theoretical knowledge. In this case, Arb specific

 

Hope this helps 👍

[Agent-Arb]

The ironic thing here is that having your climbing kit LOLERed by a non Arb inspector may mean that your insurance may be void in the event of a piece of kit failing due to his error.

 

The regs state that the kit should be inspected by someone with the relevant practical and theoretical knowledge. In this case, Arb specific

 

Hope this helps 👍

 

Yes they are great with cranes, but apart from the obvious, everything else is a lanyard. Have a similar issue.

 

Don't think they could un-insure you in the event of a failure leading to a claim from an inspector they insisted on providing. Tho they'd probably like to.

 

Would they simply say the responsibility lies with the last person that checked it? Presuming it has been used/checked since the last LOLER inspection.

 

What would a competent person's weekly checks be expected to pick up - after the non-arb LOLER inspector has asked what kind of lanyard this type of cambium-saver is, for the umpteenth time?

[OrchidArb]

Hi, I am a LOLER Inspector and i have never heard of that nor has the safety inspector or Arb Association auditor. I have a close colleague that runs a well respected arb training center and i regularly keep in touch regarding updates to regs and this has never come up. Ideally ropes should have manufacturing labels on with mfg date and serial numbers, if not then proof needs to be available of history. Rigging ropes and Climbing ropes are to be seperated into respective kits and given id's. It begs the question, has he been an inspector long? And i bed he's never been up a tree??

[OrchidArb]

I am a LOLER inspector if needed? And 15 years in tree business behind me.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Far from ideal, acknowledged, and extra expense and hassle, but where we have encountered this previously, i.e. through the ARB Approved Contractor Scheme whereby an engineer is inspecting 'arb' kit, we have required an additional inspection by someone suitably competent, including being familiar with the kit and how it is used, and 'qualified' (ACOP Feb. 2015) = "LOLER - thorough examination of arboricultural equipment."

 

Cheers,

Paul