Lolering your own gear

[treequip]

why isn't the owner of the firm trusted to LOLER the kit.

It is him/her who is closest to the climber and he/she who will feel the full force of blame should their be a fail/issue

An outside agent can lose themselves in the woodwork

 

 

 

Because, and I am in danger of repeating myself here, LOLER is WAAAAAAY bigger than our tiny industry

 

Picture if you will a crane hire company (as a random example) where the manager/owner never goes out on a job, looks at some lifting gear and decides that since times have been tight of late, that a set of chains will have to do another year, even if they are showing signs of wear..........later on the job an employee uses them and they fail

[Perkins]

The legislation says, "in practice, this PROBABLY means somebody external to your business, your insurance company MAY require you to use an independent examining engineer".

 

Too many grey areas!

 

Personally I wouldn't be shy of retiring kit because I just love buying new gear. Again, I think if you can show that kit is being retired and new kit bought in...it would help your case.

[skyhuck]

The only time you are going to have a problem is if an equipment failure caused an accident that lead to a claim.

 

IME, our equipment has a huge safety factor built into it, our climbing ropes have a breaking strain of over 3 tonnes, I've used old ones to pull trucks out of fields.

 

If you inspected your own equipment regularly, you need to be pretty thick to not spot a defect that is genuinely dangerous.

 

In 20 years I've never come across an accident caused by equipment failure.

 

Of cause if you have employees, you have a legal duty of care over those employees and getting in a more qualified person than yourself to check their gear may be a good idea, but I honestly think most of us are more than capable of knowing whats safe and whats not and would the money spent on inspections not be better spent on new gear??

 

We were told some year ago that trees had to be inspected by a qualified professional, but when it went to court the judge felt that a person with years of experience, but no qualifications was quite acceptable when it came to annual inspections.

 

Judges are not as stupid as people seem to think.

[treequip]

The legislation says, "in practice, this PROBABLY means somebody external to your business, your insurance company MAY require you to use an independent examining engineer".

 

Too many grey areas!

 

Personally I wouldn't be shy of retiring kit because I just love buying new gear. Again, I think if you can show that kit is being retired and new kit bought in...it would help your case.

 

Thats guidance not legislation

[Johny Walker]

how soon do you have to lolar new kit ,

[skyhuck]

how soon do you have to lolar new kit ,

 

6 months for climbing, 12 months for rigging.

[Peter]

Until and unless a case goes to court, there is nothing in law to prevent a suitably educated arborist from inspecting their own kit.

[High Scale]

Until and unless a case goes to court, there is nothing in law to prevent a suitably educated arborist from inspecting their own kit.

 

Yep, I do mine.

 

[Andy Collins]

Why would you want an incinerated arsonist to Loler your kit?

[skip]

how soon do you have to lolar new kit ,

 

for climbing gear it's 6 months from first use or 12 months from purchase, which ever comes sooner, that is providing it is supplied with the relevant certifacete's of conformity but that's a joke lol, if it's not supplied with a copy of the relevant conformities then it technically needs examining before first use, that's another minefield though, are the bsen's relevant to arb climbing techniques?

 

uh-oh an of worms!! leg it!

 

(oh and 12 months from purchase for rigging gear)

 

PS examining your own gear (own personal or if you are the owner of the firm) IS illegal, that is law, no question about it, having one of your staff examine everyone else's gear is a grey area and your quite right it would be for a judge to decide whether they were in fear or favor, as Dave said judges aren't as stupid as some people think, and as many cases have shown in the past judges will often come down on the side of the employees and not the employer, I wouldn't dream of risking it, you'd be made to look pretty small VERY quickly in court.Lets not forget that if a member of staff has been injured his/her loyalties may have gone strait out the window, they may be entitled to reasonable sums of money, i darn't say they may be tempted to bend the truth! were the judge to rule against their employer, they may have got someone to represent them on a no-win no fee basis, on commission even. "well your honor he didn't seem very happy when i failed such & such and with immediate effect it appeared to me i was always being sent on the nasty jobs, made to work later, etc etc, then 6 months later he said be sure you don't fail anything un-necessarily, i took this to mean that if i did my future employment may be at risk: sob sob sob" Boom!

 

In almost ANY other industry this discussion would not have continued, such an argument would be considered grossly un-professional, arbs always complain they can't charge enough money, people view us as un-professional / glorified gardeners with ladders, this is why our industry is stuck in the doldrums, marketing guru after marketing guru that looks at our industry says it, when will we listen? it doesn't really bother me, things are as they are but it does seem contradictory when the same people that hold the above gripes say ahhh but it's never been tested in court