competent splicer?

[High Scale]

So to clarify, is Bob right, or is Carl right, or are both slightly right, or both slightly wrong???? The last thing we need is confusion and misinformation:bike:

 

Well, on my LOLER course I failed an American, non CE marked climbing harness because the harness as I just pointed out, didn't have a CE mark, I was told that my decision was incorrect as although the harness had no CE mark it was new, or nearly new and in fact it could be marked down as fit for purpose Of course, the training provider could have been giving me the wrong information and if that's the case my old boss wasted his hard earned money sending me on a course which in it's self was not fit for purpose

 

Just a thought.

[Rich Rule]

Well, on my LOLER course I failed an American, non CE marked climbing harness because the harness as I just pointed out, didn't have a CE mark, I was told that my decision was incorrect as although the harness had no CE mark it was new, or nearly new and in fact it could be marked down as fit for purpose Of course, the training provider could have been giving me the wrong information and if that's the case my old boss wasted his hard earned money sending me on a course which in it's self was not fit for purpose

 

Just a thought.

 

Far from an expert that I am... but my understanding is that the CE mark is for resale within a market to say said item complies with local safety standards.

 

However, the last time I had my kit checked - about 5 weeks ago. I had some none CE marked hitchcord (AP) that had been spliced and that was passed as it was fit for purpose.

 

This also backs up what I was taught at college, albeit a while ago.

[Andy Collins]

So as long as you (Loler inspector) deem a harness, a rope or a splice fit for purpose, then it shall pass the inspection? Is this down to your own interpretation of the term "fit for purpose"? And does this therefore mean that different Loler inspectors would have differing opinions as to what the term "fit for purpose" means?

[High Scale]

So as long as you (Loler inspector) deem a harness, a rope or a splice fit for purpose, then it shall pass the inspection? Is this down to your own interpretation of the term "fit for purpose"? And does this therefore mean that different Loler inspectors would have differing opinions as to what the term "fit for purpose" means?

 

Yes I think so.

 

I am not saying I am right or that Bob is wrong. Maybe fit for purpose has ambiguous meaning with no clear definition?

Edited December 7, 2009 by High Scale

[Andy Collins]

so does the ambiguity of "fit for purpose", and the fact that 3 different Loler inspectors could have 3 conflicting opinions on the same set of equipment, not raise concerns amongst anyone? What is the point of a standard if the standard has no standard?

[Pete Mctree]

The facts as I understand them at present are ;

 

Splicing is the modification of a CE marked piece of kit therefore no longer compliant

 

Importation of non CE marked kit makes you a supplier - contrary to the requirement of the use of CE marked PPE

 

 

I'm not in total agreement with the above, but that is what defines what is "fit for purpose". As is true for any legislation that is so broard reaching, it is predominatly positive in it's outcome, however in some limited but important areas it is obviously limiting

[DrewB]

if you bring in a non CE marked piece of equipment for use by yourself, does that still make you an importer? seems strange to me, i thought CE was for selling of stuff not use. This is interesting.

[bob]

if you bring in a non CE marked piece of equipment for use by yourself, does that still make you an importer? seems strange to me, i thought CE was for selling of stuff not use. This is interesting.

 

what else can it be

you have imported it end of

[Charlieh]

im interested in this from another legal point of view, for arguments sake you have a harness that you bought from the states this can be passed as ok for use despite no-CE markings, but if you bought a saw back and were using on a work site, you leave yourself open to prosecution for use of non-CE marked kit,

 

so hows that work then, CE is legal requirement for some work equipement and not others? where is the list of what has to and doesnt have to be CE marked, or is the difference between LOLER and PUWER regs?

[bob]

Taken from lantra loler workbook

ALL items of PPE should conform to to appropriate CE standards

 

taken from nptc assessment schedule

ppe at work regs 1992

Must have evidence of conformity to appropriate european norms

 

puwer acop says it it is illegal for manufacturers or importers to supply or sell there seems to be an assumption that it not illegal to actually use non CE marked equipment. This ignores the fact that the deffinition of importer is anyone who brings the equipment into the uk not just retail buisness

 

 

puwer reg 10 Products should carry a CE marking and be accompanied by relevant certificates of conformity

 

 

i can keep going with examples

may get wife to type em all in or scan a couple of pages if folk want

 

basically fit for purpose no longer is a get out

who is the loler guy to assess that

otherwise i could make a harness and get a loler guy to pass it fit for purpose

i have been doing loler since it started and have just done an update

when i started i used to say fit for purpose ect but it,s not right

 

why cant suppliers sell non ce kit

because we cant use it

 

rich had some AP passed

did the loler guy know what it was and who had spliced and that it was not CE

sorry for rambling

i will get off my box and leave you to it unless you want me to carry on

as when i get on a subject like this i can keep going for ages

 

p.s spikes now should be inspected

honest