Double action snaphook LOLER Failure?

[Peter]

Qualified but non-practising.

 

(Would rather top conifers in the rain than look at other peoples kit)

[Pete Mctree]

Qualified. Not a massive part of my workload though

[Craig Johnson]

qualified, updated and agreeing with nod

[Dan Earp]

We use them at work and have never been failed because its not a 3way. this morning I've asked all 4 inspectors and they've all said its shouldn't of been failed.

One also came back to me and said that its a horizontal positioning device and that feet should/must be on a branch stem etc to be used.

Ill know more when another who's looking into this further and let me know

[explorer arb]

the examiner has to assess whether the item is Fit For Purpose the application in this case is arboricultural climbing operations so lets set rigging aside.

 

the examiner has many resources at his disposal to form a decision on whether or not the item is FFP for this application, many of which nod has noted.

 

this decision can certainly be described as an opinion and ultimately the responsibility of the decision on the record lies with competent person.

 

My decision relating to 2-way HOOKS for this application differs to my decision in relation to 2-way 'twistlock' karabiners.

 

in certain theater & circus rigging applications these 2-way hooks are regarded as a far safer method of attachment than a 3-way karabiner as it requires two synchronized, opposite opposing motions to open it as opposed to the single diagonal motion on a 3-way krab, i'm sure many of us have had one 'roll open' against a branch?

 

Many of these hooks are designed to click onto 'end bolts' of a set diameter which have a double nut stopper on the end to prevent them from sliding off naturally earning them the name 'clickers' in some industries

 

Ultimately the decision rests with the individual examiner if he/she is satisfied that the design of the connector is FFP they may 'Pass' it if not then they are entitled to 'Fail' it.

 

The fact that a 2-way hook is 2-way would certainly not lead me to fail it, i know of a firm that had every rope failed because it did not have a manufacturers marking on the outside of the rope, that company decided to go back to their old examiner who did not deem this necessary, perhaps you should look to change your examiner if your not happy?

[High Scale]

Qualified, updated but can't be bothered.

[skyhuck]

Surely if an item is in good condition it can't be failed, if the examiner feels its not fit for purpose they should simply refuse to examine it.

[treequip]

the examiner has to assess whether the item is Fit For Purpose the application in this case is arb......

 

 

The HSE guidance on this differs from your opinion.

 

It only makes mention of defects or weaknesses, there is no mention of assessing the equipment's fitness for purpose.

 

person who has appropriate practical and theoretical knowledge and experience to enable them to detect defects or weaknesses in the equipment

 

It goes on to make several further mention of defects but comes nowhere near assessing the application of the kit.

[nod]

the examiner has to assess whether the item is Fit For Purpose the application in this case is arboricultural climbing operations so lets set rigging aside.

 

the examiner has many resources at his disposal to form a decision on whether or not the item is FFP for this application, many of which nod has noted.

 

this decision can certainly be described as an opinion and ultimately the responsibility of the decision on the record lies with competent person.

 

My decision relating to 2-way HOOKS for this application differs to my decision in relation to 2-way 'twistlock' karabiners.

 

in certain theater & circus rigging applications these 2-way hooks are regarded as a far safer method of attachment than a 3-way karabiner as it requires two synchronized, opposite opposing motions to open it as opposed to the single diagonal motion on a 3-way krab, i'm sure many of us have had one 'roll open' against a branch?

 

Many of these hooks are designed to click onto 'end bolts' of a set diameter which have a double nut stopper on the end to prevent them from sliding off naturally earning them the name 'clickers' in some industries

 

Ultimately the decision rests with the individual examiner if he/she is satisfied that the design of the connector is FFP they may 'Pass' it if not then they are entitled to 'Fail' it.

 

The fact that a 2-way hook is 2-way would certainly not lead me to fail it, i know of a firm that had every rope failed because it did not have a manufacturers marking on the outside of the rope, that company decided to go back to their old examiner who did not deem this necessary, perhaps you should look to change your examiner if your not happy?

 

:thumbup:

[Pete Mctree]

Surely if an item is in good condition it can't be failed, if the examiner feels its not fit for purpose they should simply refuse to examine it.

 

I would simply comment on it's condition & pass it, however I would then comment on it's usage & that i thought it was inappropriate for the task (not an issue in this case for me). Simple & transparent