Loler Thorough Inspection, advice wanted

[Keithrturner]

I have been asked to look at getting on this course in order to take over the inspection and recording of all our kit (6+climbing kits + lowering + Rigging, etc)

 

The course prerequisites suggest either CS38, 39, etc or 5 years experience. although exceptions may be made in some cases / supportive roles.

 

I have only CS30/31 but have been working for a professional company for nearly 2 years, this has seen me move from the groundwork and now taking more of an office based role, quoting, estimates, prepping jobs, organising teams, etc etc. I have done a bit of climbing (and a past history as a rock climbing instructor) and have a reaasonably sound knowledge, allbeit not the tickets to back it up.

 

Basically I'm after any advice from providers of this course (or those who have taken it) to help decide if I would be able to do the course.

[Andrew McEwan]

It may be worth speaking to your insurer first, as I suspect they would need some convincing to expand your PI to cover loler reports without supporting tickets, and details of how you will address impartiality.

[Andrew Gale]

Have a chat with the training provider, they'll be able to tell you if you've enough experience etc.

 

I've done the course and it is very knowledge based, mainly on the different types of kit etc that is available to the working arb, so if you've not been in the industry that long, that may be a problem.

[treequip]

I have had a non arb LOLER inspector bring kit for identification. He had been given an load of arb kit to inspect and didn't have a clue what most of it was

 

Ask yourself this, if I were to be handed a piece of kit would I know what it was for and be able to assess its suitability for continued use?

[frets1]

I have been asked to look at getting on this course in order to take over the inspection and recording of all our kit (6+climbing kits + lowering + Rigging, etc)

 

The course prerequisites suggest either CS38, 39, etc or 5 years experience. although exceptions may be made in some cases / supportive roles.

 

I have only CS30/31 but have been working for a professional company for nearly 2 years, this has seen me move from the groundwork and now taking more of an office based role, quoting, estimates, prepping jobs, organising teams, etc etc. I have done a bit of climbing (and a past history as a rock climbing instructor) and have a reaasonably sound knowledge, allbeit not the tickets to back it up.

 

Basically I'm after any advice from providers of this course (or those who have taken it) to help decide if I would be able to do the course.

 

can I ask where the course is and cost. I was wondering can you check your own kit?!

that's what we all used to do anyway. but long term it might be cheaper.

speak to the providers of the course and see what they say.

if you can, go for it. I cant find a local loler inspector near me. could be a useful thing to have. good luck.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Another benefit to having someone in the company 'LOLER Inspector' qualified, albeit the CS41 'aerial tree rigging' is the key one, and obviously therefore the combination is ideal, is that it contributes to the 'competent person' role required under the regs.

 

Just an aside...from my obscure world

 

Cheers..

Paul

[TIMON]

Another benefit to having someone in the company 'LOLER Inspector' qualified, albeit the CS41 'aerial tree rigging' is the key one, and obviously therefore the combination is ideal, is that it contributes to the 'competent person' role required under the regs.

 

 

 

Just an aside...from my obscure world

 

 

 

Cheers..

 

Paul

 

 

Hi Paul ,

We're doing the LOLER course in October and CS41 in January as well as coming to your seminar in Winchester. Are you going to the APF?

Thanks,

Timon

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Yup, be there all 3 days :-)

 

Cheers Timon..

Paul

[benedmonds]

Another benefit to having someone in the company 'LOLER Inspector' qualified, albeit the CS41 'aerial tree rigging' is the key one, and obviously therefore the combination is ideal, is that it contributes to the 'competent person' role required under the regs.

 

Don't the regs state that the inspector "should" be external? We had a council insist that we had to have an external assessor.

[Shane]

I recall (old git's memory so maybe not 100% correct) it should be someone who is competent and with no vested interest in saving money for the owner of the kit.

 

That would seem to make sense as an employee could be seen as 'co-ercable' (no idea if that is the right spelling). Another company maybe, local arb supplier????