loler inspection course

[Mesterh]

unfortunately not, that part of the law is clear, it is also just that: LAW. do you by chance know what standards your chainsaw you use must comply with by law? chain brake? anti vib mounts? chain catcher? nope, none of those it must have a hand guard, a clearly marked on off switch & ppe stickers. the rest is best practice.

So, according to your 'half decent' lawyer you'd be fine in court if your employee/subbie cuts himself with a saw which has no chain brake??

To put it in simple terms in court loler has even more weight & you and your lawyer would be obliterated in either of the cases. And if an event unfortunately turns out to be fatal you'd be looking at a jail term since corprate manslaughter was introduced a few years ago. Good luck buddy

(PS the term 'compitent person' is a legal term which refers to 'what that person should know or what standards they should be trained to.'

moreover the legislation needs not to expand on such terms)

 

 

Well I am non the wiser.

 

'what that person should know or what standards they should be trained to.'

 

Does it say what they should know and what standard they should be trained to? Because I couldnt find it anywhere:confused1:

 

I just dont understand why you can do a NPTC training course and still not be up to the standard loler are asking for, what are you supposed to do then?

 

Maybe I am more competent since I have seen and handled more kit than those that have been on a course. Please note I havent been on said courses I am only going off what you said.

 

The stuff about the legal side of chainsaw although true shows what pants good practice and law are.

If someone has an accident with a saw the boss could be prosecuted because one of the ppe stickers has been scratched off but everything else is in good working order!

 

I still cant find any info anywhere on the number of accidents though kit failure, most accidents from what I see are caused through misuse.

I have a rope and harness that are 10+ years old (not in use of course) which would fail an inspection on just about everything but I would be more than happy to use them.

 

I would be very surprised if there are more than one or two companies in my area that get complete kit inspections done every 6 months.

Ours get checked every week by me, in addition to daily checks on the job.

 

There is even confusion over where brand new kit should be inspected before use, well from what others have said on this site.

 

My Treeflex harness says that it should be inspected every 12 months and thats from the manufacture.

[bob]

I think you mean competent person.

 

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

 

me neither

lead by example

[educated arborist]

 

Maybe I am more competent since I have seen and handled more kit than those that have been on a course. Please note I havent been on said courses I am only going off what you said.

 

The stuff about the legal side of chainsaw although true shows what pants good practice and law are.

If someone has an accident with a saw the boss could be prosecuted because one of the ppe stickers has been scratched off but everything else is in good working order!

 

I have a rope and harness that are 10+ years old (not in use of course) which would fail an inspection on just about everything but I would be more than happy to use them.

 

 

So you consider your self to be a competent person? Do you beleive that if i were to place 20 items of kit in front of you that you could cary out a thorough examination? Are you a betting man? if you were to pass one item with a significant\defect or fail an item which has no significant defects then i'll levy £200 and vice versa?

And why is it that your 10 year old rope & harness fail? what defects have you identified on them?

Loler inspecting is an incredibly complex job with stakes far higher than a £200 wager, I have numerous clients, many on this site, which are some of the most responsible, experianced & safety consious within our industry & when i return them a harness which has failed/had its inspection period significantly reduced they are concerned that they did not identify the defect them-selves in their daily inspections or weekly log. They are not however expected to learn whipping patterns, splicing tecniques, stitching patterns & configerations etc, etc, etc, etc. and that is why they have a thorough examination every six months (PPE) (12 months rigging)

One of the most commen things people say to me is Oh and that didn't fail? or are we alowed to use these/arnt these banned in arb? So many people cliam to be experts but are often not.

a competent person is (Someone with the practical & theoretical knowledge and experience) so a cs38 certified tree surgeon well practiced without a prolonged break from the industry is arguably a competant person to preform a daily inspection & was tested on this during their cs 38 exam. As an employer copying his/her nptc card/certificates, referencing their employment history & ensuring they carry out their daily inspection before climbimbing are all pretty standard measures. Commen sence?, not hard is it?

So what is it you can do to ensure your loler inspector is competent? no more than copy his nptc, varify it's no. & ask for references & ensure his T&C state that he will carry out a thorough examination as a copetent person, commmen sence????????? you have then taken all reasonable measures in a courts eyes no?

[educated arborist]

me neither

lead by example

 

caun't spel, gilty as chargedd

 

dysslXia excuse or reason? (lets not start a new thread)

[Buzzsurgeon]

So you consider your self to be a competent person? Do you beleive that if i were to place 20 items of kit in front of you that you could cary out a thorough examination? Are you a betting man? if you were to pass one item with a significantdefect or fail an item which has no significant defects then i'll levy £200 and vice versa?

And why is it that your 10 year old rope & harness fail? what defects have you identified on them?

Loler inspecting is an incredibly complex job with stakes far higher than a £200 wager, I have numerous clients, many on this site, which are some of the most responsible, experianced & safety consious within our industry & when i return them a harness which has failed/had its inspection period significantly reduced they are concerned that they did not identify the defect them-selves in their daily inspections or weekly log. They are not however expected to learn whipping patterns, splicing tecniques, stitching patterns & configerations etc, etc, etc, etc. and that is why they have a thorough examination every six months (PPE) (12 months rigging)

One of the most commen things people say to me is Oh and that didn't fail? or are we alowed to use these/arnt these banned in arb? So many people cliam to be experts but are often not.

a competent person is (Someone with the practical & theoretical knowledge and experience) so a cs38 certified tree surgeon well practiced without a prolonged break from the industry is arguably a competant person to preform a daily inspection & was tested on this during their cs 38 exam. As an employer copying his/her nptc card/certificates, referencing their employment history & ensuring they carry out their daily inspection before climbimbing are all pretty standard measures. Commen sence?, not hard is it?

So what is it you can do to ensure your loler inspector is competent? no more than copy his nptc, varify it's no. & ask for references & ensure his T&C state that he will carry out a thorough examination as a copetent person, commmen sence????????? you have then taken all reasonable measures in a courts eyes no?

 

Can't understand why loler inspection is such a complex job? As described it is only an inspection nothing is tested, just a visual inspection how hard can it be, common sense? Stupid law that makes the job more difficult and expensive. I can fully understand testing real lifting equipment such as cranes and platforms, which are a bit more technical than a length of rope??? I know it needs to be done in the new world of no win no fee, but what a waste of time and money in my mind!!

Edited February 12, 2009 by Buzzsurgeon

[Buzzsurgeon]

Forgot to mention who will come and loler the tree I am climbing?????

[Jason James Gairn]

I think you mean competent person.

 

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

 

I think you meant,"I think you meant competent person."

Sorry, also couldn't help myself:001_tongue:

[High Scale]

I think you meant,"I think you meant competent person."

Sorry, also couldn't help myself:001_tongue:

 

Yes, correcting peoples grammar or English is not something that I should be doing.

Edited February 13, 2009 by High Scale

[Jason James Gairn]

Yes, correcting peoples grammar or English is not something that I should be doing.

 

Or me.

[educated arborist]

Can't understand why loler inspection is such a complex job? As described it is only an inspection nothing is tested, just a visual inspection how hard can it be, common sense? Stupid law that makes the job more difficult and expensive. I can fully understand testing real lifting equipment such as cranes and platforms, which are a bit more technical than a length of rope??? I know it needs to be done in the new world of no win no fee, but what a waste of time and money in my mind!!

 

What a fantistic attitude, prooves how little you know, so up for that wager yourself then? pm me your phone no & address & we'll set it up?

 

I am in very close contact with crane & MEWP inspectors & am qualified to inspect MEWPS myslelf & every one of them is baffled by the complexity of ropes & harnesses in arb.

 

I in-fact have run training courses for mewp inspectors interested in inspecting our equipment, five dats in not one candidate felt they could learn & retain the practical & theoretical knowlege & experiance to responsibly inspect our equipment.