Andy Dingley wrote:
On 29 Jan, 14:33, "whisky-dave" wrote:

Just suppose someone gets electrocuted by an appliance that has been PAT
tested OK and has since become faulty, who 'gets it in the neck'

There is no statutory requirement to PAT test.

There is a statutory requirement to manage risk, by assessing it and
then taking action _as_appropriate_.

PAT testing _may_ be decided to be part of that. If you're a high-risk
environment, even typical PAT testing procedures or schedules might
not be considered as competent for it. If you're a "typical office"
then one simple situation is to decide that brand new equipment
doesn't need to be PAT tested on arrival (and how often have we seen
the pointless ritual of "cutting off the new plugs" etc.)

So if someone gets a zap, why? Is it a "do nothing" policy that's
inadequate (who agreed that?) Clearly damaged equipment that was used
regardless (Is there an effective policy for getting things fixed?
What does you new starter training say to do?) How did it become
faulty, misuse or fair wear? Does the inspection interval need to be
shorter, or to have specific inspections added to it? (testing off-
site kit whenever it returns is a prime need).

Last time I saw a PAT tester at work, we discussed this. The plan seemed
to be that new equipment could be used - and would simply be on the
testing list the next time he came (up to a year hence). In the ordinary
office environment, that seemed perfectly reasonable.

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org