PAT testing

[deepbass5]

just to close a couple of points down.

I have been asked several times to send copies of my PAT testing records and public liability insurance to venues ahead of the Gig. Civic Halls run by councils are a favourite and some hotel chains.
They are just fulfilling their duty to the public attending a function on their premises. They have a duty to ensure their fixed electrical system is safe and has been tested and certificated. They now need to worry about a bunch of jean clad beer swilling junkies wanting to plug guitar amps into the premises mains supply!!!! . What if they Kill someone - we had better ask if they have PAT tested their equipment that should slow um down.
People still think bands electrocute each other and throw Tele's out of hotel windows.

[Dad3353]

[quote name='deepbass5' timestamp='1391551455' post='2358593']...and throw Tele's out of hotel windows.[/quote]

Heresy, and waste of a good guitar..! We prefer to destroy TV sets.

[flyfisher]

[quote name='xilddx' timestamp='1391545165' post='2358477']
That quote about kitchens ain't one from me mate.
[/quote]

I know, it was TimR. Not sure how that happened - apart from being my fault, obviously! My apologies and now corrected.


[quote name='xilddx' timestamp='1391545165' post='2358477']
Most people's knee jerk reactions that it's red tape and a money making opportunity are normally based on bullshit.
[/quote]

Agreed, suggesting a problem of awareness somewhere.

[TimR]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391553032' post='2358621']
...

Agreed, suggesting a problem of awareness somewhere.
[/quote]

It's mainly the Daily Mail trying to sell papers and Jeremy Clarkson trying to sell books.

[KevB]

[quote name='xilddx' timestamp='1391537040' post='2358316'] Policy should be based upon legal requirements. Formal guidelines can be found here http://www.hse.gov.uk/electricity/faq-portable-appliance-testing.htm and here http://www.hse.gov.uk/event-safety/electrical-safety.htm [/quote]

From HSE site:

The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 require that any electrical equipment that has the potential to cause injury is maintained in a safe condition.[b] However, the Regulations do not specify what needs to be done, by whom or how frequently (ie they don't make inspection or testing of electrical appliances a legal requirement, nor do they make it a legal requirement to undertake this annually). [/b]

[TimR]

[quote name='KevB' timestamp='1391597232' post='2358894']


From HSE site:

The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 require that any electrical equipment that has the potential to cause injury is maintained in a safe condition.[b] However, the Regulations do not specify what needs to be done, by whom or how frequently (ie they don't make inspection or testing of electrical appliances a legal requirement, nor do they make it a legal requirement to undertake this annually). [/b]
[/quote]

Yes. This is deliberately kept 'wooly' because it depends on every individual situation. This is where the 'common sense' part of real life takes over.

If there is a problem you will need to demonstrate that you used your electrical knowledge and all the information available to you to come to a sensible decision. And as above, an expert witness will be bought in to agree/disagree you acted correctly.

[toneknob]

Interesting reading all round - thanks everyone. And very good timing too, as I need to get two amps, some hifi gear and maybe a PA tested before a venue will let me use my gear rather than their own (at their own vastly inflated money-printing machine price).

Can anyone recommend a PAT tester in or around SW London? Or shall I just call up a local electrician?

[flyfisher]

Out of interest, if you have your gear PAT tested (should that really be PATed?) how does the tester decide on the 'next test' date, given all the variables? Surely a mains cable used to power a desk PC that will probably not be disturbed for the next few years is a completely different case to a mains lead used by a band that does a few gigs every week?

My bet is that they just allow one year whatever the circumstances - which rather makes a mockery of all this 'competent person' and 'appropriate test regime' interpretation of the acknowledged 'wooliness' of the basic regulations.

[xilddx]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391601546' post='2358977']
Out of interest, if you have your gear PAT tested (should that really be PATed?) how does the tester decide on the 'next test' date, given all the variables? Surely a mains cable used to power a desk PC that will probably not be disturbed for the next few years is a completely different case to a mains lead used by a band that does a few gigs every week?

My bet is that they just allow one year whatever the circumstances - which rather makes a mockery of all this 'competent person' and 'appropriate test regime' interpretation of the acknowledged 'wooliness' of the basic regulations.
[/quote]

Again, it's down to the tester's knowledge of the hazards and risks involved. For offices where the PAT testers sweep the areas testing everything it will probably be every two years depending on the equipment, or perhaps annually. They need to talk to the H&S team or managers responsible for the equipment as they will be aware of the requirements.

The regs have to be guidance only for PAT regard as there are many variables, equipment, usage, environment, hazard ID and risk assessment.

PAT testing is only one element of the precautions.

[flyfisher]

Fair points, but it suggests that the PAT testers have to have knowledge of the circumstances and how can they cover every eventuality? In an office environment I can see that there will likely be a person responsible for the company H&S policies and everything will have been determined beforehand, so the PAT tester is called in at the appropriate intervals and told to label everything for next testing as required. Fine.

But how does a typical gigging band deal with all this? Who is likely to be competent enough to draw up a band 'H&S policy' and decide how often their stuff should be tested. OK, so they phone up the nearest PAT tester, but how do they know if they are competent to judge the risks of a gigging band? Are there PAT testers who specialise in different fields?

[TimR]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391609536' post='2359149']
Fair points, but it suggests that the PAT testers have to have knowledge of the circumstances and how can they cover every eventuality? In an office environment I can see that there will likely be a person responsible for the company H&S policies and everything will have been determined beforehand, so the PAT tester is called in at the appropriate intervals and told to label everything for next testing as required. Fine.

But how does a typical gigging band deal with all this? Who is likely to be competent enough to draw up a band 'H&S policy' and decide how often their stuff should be tested. OK, so they phone up the nearest PAT tester, but how do they know if they are competent to judge the risks of a gigging band? Are there PAT testers who specialise in different fields?
[/quote]

You have a conversation with the guy. He'll understand your needs with the information you give him. If it's outside his experience then he should decline to Test the equipment. However, any court is going to look at what he could reasonable expect.

When your drummer gets electrocuted because he forced his bass drum spike through your amp cable or your roadie slams a cable in the van door when packing gear away then that's an accident. You can't cover everything, all you can do is take reasonably practicable precautions. Everyone should be vigilant for obvious damage, the tester can only do so much.

Like an MOT. It's a reduction in likelyhood, not an absolute catch all. Doing something is better than doing nothing.

Edited February 5, 2014 by TimR

[flyfisher]

Good examples of the tough life that a gigging band can inflict on gear. So just doing something may not be enough to absolve someone from negligence if they've used a PAT tester who knows nothing about such things and normally just tests PCs in offices. Once a month might not be considered overkill if the band is gigging a few times each week and I'd bet you could find an expert witness somewhere who would stand in the dock and say so. What then?

That'ss the problem with all this woolly 'something is better than nothing', 'you interpret what you need' type stuff.

And it's nothing like an MOT because that's a clearly defined legal requirement and you have to go to a certified test station for a fully specified series of tests by a formally licenced expert. It could easily be argued that an annual MOT is total overkill for someone doing 1500 miles a year on the school run but not enough for a company car doing 50,000 miles a year. But from a liability perspective none of that matters because the law only requires the car to have a valid MOT certificate after which there's no room for debate. In comparison, the PAT requirements are a can of worms.

[xilddx]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391609536' post='2359149']
Fair points, but it suggests that the PAT testers have to have knowledge of the circumstances and how can they cover every eventuality? In an office environment I can see that there will likely be a person responsible for the company H&S policies and everything will have been determined beforehand, so the PAT tester is called in at the appropriate intervals and told to label everything for next testing as required. Fine.

But how does a typical gigging band deal with all this? Who is likely to be competent enough to draw up a band 'H&S policy' and decide how often their stuff should be tested. OK, so they phone up the nearest PAT tester, but how do they know if they are competent to judge the risks of a gigging band? Are there PAT testers who specialise in different fields?
[/quote]

You don't need a written H&S policy in a band, not generally anyway. Only employers of 5 or more people need written policies.

The PAT tester should be asking about the equipment and how it's used.

Apart from a few strict duties, H&S law does not require risks to be eliminated, but they should be mitigated so far as reasonably practicable.

However, I agree that it can be difficult to even make bands aware they have any H&S responsibilities. Given that most small venues they play will be in far worse shape than the bands' equipment, and that few, if any, H&S requirements are required of the band by the venue. Insurance companies providing PLI could do more I reckon.

[TimR]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391616879' post='2359283']
Good examples of the tough life that a gigging band can inflict on gear. So just doing something may not be enough to absolve someone from negligence if they've used a PAT tester who knows nothing about such things and normally just tests PCs in offices. Once a month might not be considered overkill if the band is gigging a few times each week and I'd bet you could find an expert witness somewhere who would stand in the dock and say so. What then?

That'ss the problem with all this woolly 'something is better than nothing', 'you interpret what you need' type stuff.

And it's nothing like an MOT because that's a clearly defined legal requirement and you have to go to a certified test station for a fully specified series of tests by a formally licenced expert. It could easily be argued that an annual MOT is total overkill for someone doing 1500 miles a year on the school run but not enough for a company car doing 50,000 miles a year. But from a liability perspective none of that matters because the law only requires the car to have a valid MOT certificate after which there's no room for debate. In comparison, the PAT requirements are a can of worms.
[/quote]

You're talking nonsense again.

The MOT is a test of road worthiness at a particular point in time. As soon as you leave the garage it's the responsibility of the driver to ensure the car remains roadworthy.

The same with PAT. The tester gives you a certificate that says it's ok now at that moment in time. After that if something happens it's down to the owner of the equipment. The owner is quite at liberty to argue that the PAT wasn't done properly. In which case the tester shows all his documents and qualifications and argues he did.

[xilddx]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1391617756' post='2359300']
You're talking nonsense again.

The MOT is a test of road worthiness at a particular point in time. As soon as you leave the garage it's the responsibility of the driver to ensure the car remains roadworthy.

The same with PAT. The tester gives you a certificate that says it's ok now at that moment in time. After that if something happens it's down to the owner of the equipment. The owner is quite at liberty to argue that the PAT wasn't done properly. In which case the tester shows all his documents and qualifications and argues he did.
[/quote]
Exactly. I've been saying all along PAT is only one of the precautions.

[oggiesnr]

Whether it's right or not, most venues (and markets which are my main source of income) have decided that a yearly test is what they're looking for.

It's simpler and less stressful to go along with it than start arguing the toss. For markets and events I just have a dossier of forms and photos on the computer which I print out and send as needed. This includes not only the PAT test certificate but copies of my Public Liability and Product Liability Insurance, wind rating certificate for the gazebo, risk assessment, names and ID of partners and photos of stands etc. Quick up date once a year and the job's a good 'un. I don't like spending money anymore than the next person but I've found a decent PAT tester who reminds my every year when the tests are "due" and is very reasonable cost wise. Even with the number of cables and lights I have (and I have 240v inside and outside equipment and 110v ditto) I reckon it's cheaper than buying the kit and doing it myself and if something happens I'm pretty well covered (and I have legal insurance just in case it gets serious).

Steve

[gilmour]

I do my own PAT testing.

I bought a kit that came with an instructional DVD, then you do an online test and get a certificate for competency. I'm comfortable that when I do it I do it properly and that the equipment is safe. I've never had any questions or issues with it from venues etc.

All in it cost about £350 however by the time you've paid someone to come out and d a whole bands backline more than once you've made your money back.

[flyfisher]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1391617756' post='2359300']
The MOT is a test of road worthiness at a particular point in time. As soon as you leave the garage it's the responsibility of the driver to ensure the car remains roadworthy.
[/quote]

So how does the driver do that then?

One day, you take your car to a fully equipped workshop full of calibrated test equipment staffed by experienced, qualified and licenced people and after about an hour of legally specified detailed testing they give you a certificate stating the car is safe enough to be driven on the public roads.

For the next 364 days you expect a totally unqualified person to ensure the car stays in the same condition.

But at least the MOT test is specified. PAT testing intervals are completely open to interpretation.

[flyfisher]

[quote name='oggiesnr' timestamp='1391619321' post='2359335']
Whether it's right or not, most venues (and markets which are my main source of income) have decided that a yearly test is what they're looking for.

[b]It's simpler and less stressful to go along with it than start arguing the toss.[/b] For markets and events I just have a dossier of forms and photos on the computer which I print out and send as needed. This includes not only the PAT test certificate but copies of my Public Liability and Product Liability Insurance, wind rating certificate for the gazebo, risk assessment, names and ID of partners and photos of stands etc. Quick up date once a year and the job's a good 'un. I don't like spending money anymore than the next person but I've found a decent PAT tester who reminds my every year when the tests are "due" and is very reasonable cost wise. Even with the number of cables and lights I have (and I have 240v inside and outside equipment and 110v ditto) I reckon it's cheaper than buying the kit and doing it myself and if something happens I'm pretty well covered (and I have legal insurance just in case it gets serious).
[/quote]

Absolutely right, plus you can never win the argument anyway. No CRB checks in your 'dossier' then? Can't be long before that's needed as well.

I reckon this is how the human race will eventually end; drowned in regulations and nobody being able to do anything without training or sign-off by a 'competent person' and an associated insurance policy.

[TimR]

Fly, you're being deliberately obtuse again.

[flyfisher]

Yeah, well that's what happens when you get old and cranky and start to see things for what they are instead of just going along with them. Not that I have any choice, of course, except to have the occasional rant. On your own heads be it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyBKz1wdK0M

[oggiesnr]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391620611' post='2359355']

Absolutely right, plus you can never win the argument anyway. No CRB checks in your 'dossier' then? Can't be long before that's needed as well.

[/quote]

Now called a DBS check It's an anomaly but you can't get one done on yourself either as a sole trader or a partnership. Fortunately my work doesn't need one (and neither does playing in a band in a school although I've known them be asked for, the school shut up when it was pointed out the a) it would cost them money and were their policies so lax that they gave unsupervised access to their pupils on school grounds).

Steve

[Dad3353]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391622107' post='2359374']
Yeah, well that's what happens when you get old and cranky and start to see things for what they are instead of just going along with them. Not that I have any choice, of course, except to have the occasional rant. On your own heads be it. [/quote]

...which led me nicely to here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BW33xkVB-oI#t=197

...which I found interesting (although somewhat OT, I'm afraid...). Thanks for sharing...

[TimR]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391622107' post='2359374']
Yeah, well that's what happens when you get old and cranky and start to see things for what they are instead of just going along with them. Not that I have any choice, of course, except to have the occasional rant. On your own heads be it.
...
[/quote]

My point is you're pretending you don't understand why it's done and you're deliberately trying to find excuses why it's a bad thing. Now you're likening it to being like a frog in a pressure cooker.

Another poster and myself have posted real world examples of dangerous occurrences that have been found or would have been found if checked by a competent person but incompetent people have been using in a dangerous state.

Surely you are either now just being obtuse for the sake if it or you really are daft!

[flyfisher]

Even I can't rant on for as long as that, but it was a good one.

Actually, it reminds me of an R4 Any Questions programme recently that came from Wales. One of the topics was about the poor performance of Welsh schools (http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/10850989.Wales_still_worst_in_UK_in_global_school_tests/) and one of the panel blamed the Inistence on teaching many of the lessons in Welsh, not only for the problems that alone brings but also because of the requirement for teachers to be bi-lingual. One of the panel pointed out how difficult it was to find good science and maths teachers who are also bilingual. Even the parents are moaning: [url="http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6303470"]http://www.tes.co.uk...orycode=6303470[/url]

Let's be honest - what is the point? What is the point of language if not to communicate? How much better would it be if everybody spoke the same language? But no. A tiny minorityof people decide that an obscure language spoken only by a bit of half a million people (welsh population = 2.4m - [url="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-20677528"]http://www.bbc.co.uk...-wales-20677528[/url]) should be forced upon the majority and, as a result, hamper their educational attainment and their life-chances in a predominantly English-speaking UK. Genius. Still, they are allowed to get away with it so who are the stupid ones?


(Edited for formatting corrections) Edited February 5, 2014 by flyfisher