LOLER certificates for tractor and loader

[DrWazzock]

A tractor loader can't pass a loler type test. I think it was due to no check valves like a telehandler.

Check valves weren’t much use when the main lift ram cylinder split like a banana on my neighbours teiehandler.

 

[Interested in farming]

Why can’t you check your own repairs?

In short because the HSE says so, this is taken from their ACOP and I've spent many a long hour discussing this with maintenance managers where I worked.

Basic premise is like spell checking your own work, you don't always spot your mistakes and (unbelievably) some people are just DODGY.

Bottom line is if something goes wrong and you have a proper TE, it's one less stick to beat you with and a useful mitigating factor 'the equipment was fully inspected and maintained your honour'.

Can you tell I have a background in defending civil claims ? Defending insurance claims was a huge learning curve but it can be done.

What is a 'competent person'?​

The term 'competent person' is not defined in law but the LOLER Approved Code of Practice and guidance (paragraph 296 on competent persons) states that:

'You should ensure that the person carrying out a thorough examination has such appropriate practical and theoretical knowledge and experience of the lifting equipment to be thoroughly examined as will enable them to detect defects or weaknesses and to assess their importance in relation to the safety and continued use of the lifting equipment.'

Although the competent person may often be employed by another organisation, this is not necessary, provided they are sufficiently independent and impartial to ensure that in-house examinations are made without fear or favour. However, this should not be the same person who undertakes routine maintenance of the equipment - as they would then be responsible for assessing their own maintenance work.

 

[Interested in farming]

Check valves weren’t much use when the main lift ram cylinder split like a banana on my neighbours teiehandler.

Amazing how many people rely on check valves when they are known to go wrong. We never never let anyone under our hydraulic conveyor unless supported due the risk of a valve (or something else) failing. Heard horror stories of mechanics crushed in tipper bodies as well.

 

[DrWazzock]

In short because the HSE says so, this is taken from their ACOP and I've spent many a long hour discussing this with maintenance managers where I worked.

Basic premise is like spell checking your own work, you don't always spot your mistakes and (unbelievably) some people are just DODGY.

Bottom line is if something goes wrong and you have a proper TE, it's one less stick to beat you with and a useful mitigating factor 'the equipment was fully inspected and maintained your honour'.

Can you tell I have a background in defending civil claims ? Defending insurance claims was a huge learning curve but it can be done.

What is a 'competent person'?​

The term 'competent person' is not defined in law but the LOLER Approved Code of Practice and guidance (paragraph 296 on competent persons) states that:

'You should ensure that the person carrying out a thorough examination has such appropriate practical and theoretical knowledge and experience of the lifting equipment to be thoroughly examined as will enable them to detect defects or weaknesses and to assess their importance in relation to the safety and continued use of the lifting equipment.'

Although the competent person may often be employed by another organisation, this is not necessary, provided they are sufficiently independent and impartial to ensure that in-house examinations are made without fear or favour. However, this should not be the same person who undertakes routine maintenance of the equipment - as they would then be responsible for assessing their own maintenance work.

It’s a fine ideal but getting almost impossible to satisfy all of the time for one man band self employed farmers. I was used to having stuff checked and approved by two different people in corporate industry but on farms with maybe at just two family members self employed it can get prohibitively expensive and cause unacceptable delay to get in the necessary third party every time something needs checking.
I’m no expert but it just seems the way things are going, it’s the corporate way or the highway.
Going a bit wider, I’m a chartered engineer but not trusted to inspect my own sprayer or even drive it for that matter without attending annual training course yet my 93 year old father in law, who hadn’t taken a test for 70 years can take his Ford fiesta up the M3 any time he likes. I refuse point blank to get in the car with him.

 

[DrWazzock]

How many horse boxes, caravans etc are driven by competent people, subject to ongoing training and assessment. How many check the horse box or caravan before every journey. How many horse boxes or caravans are even checked at all by a third party? We all know the answer to that and it’s because if legislation was tightened the government would lose votes whereas small business owners are seen as an insignificant minority electorally and a cash cow for all sorts of cooked up schemes and regulatory wheezes.
I’m a bit fed up of it to be honest.

 

[Interested in farming]

It’s a fine ideal but getting almost impossible to satisfy all of the time for one man band self employed farmers. I was used to having stuff checked and approved by two different people in corporate industry but on farms with maybe at just two family members self employed it can get prohibitively expensive and cause unacceptable delay to get in the necessary third party every time something needs checking.
I’m no expert but it just seems the way things are going, it’s the corporate way or the highway.
Going a bit wider, I’m a chartered engineer but not trusted to inspect my own sprayer or even drive it for that matter without attending annual training course yet my 93 year old father in law, who hadn’t taken a test for 70 years can take his Ford fiesta up the M3 any time he likes. I refuse point blank to get in the car with him.

I'm not going to defend the legislation or argue your points about experience v training. in my opinion safety is at a point where one size fits all isn't appropriate and I see the difference between a self employed farmer and a warehouse of lift trucks. I just want famers to be aware of the law as it stands. There will absolutely be people out there passing unsafe kit for the right price too,

 

[DrWazzock]

What I will also add is that a degree in multidisciplinary engineering from one of the top universities in the land then working your balls off to reach chartered engineer status is worthless in the face of the army of clipboard wielding jobsworths we face today. Not bragging, in fact there’s nothing to brag about because my qualifications are seen as completely worthless by NRoSO, NSTS, LOLER, HSE, etc. So don’t waste your time on an education, save your pennies for attending all the countless C and G modules all the annual CPD points win prices Mickey Mouse courses that make you truly qualified to do the job.

 

[DrWazzock]

Rant over.

 

[DrWazzock]

We’ve succeeded in splitting the workforce into two separate halves:
The operatives and inspectors who blindly follow procedures and tick checklists and the academics at the top who dream up the procedures and checklists but could not operate or maintain the equipment proficiently to save their lives.
As for people who can actually think on their feet about what they are doing, well they are gradually becoming extinct.

 

[Interested in farming]

What I will also add is that a degree in multidisciplinary engineering from one of the top universities in the land then working your balls off to reach chartered engineer status is worthless in the face of the army of clipboard wielding jobsworths we face today. Not bragging, in fact there’s nothing to brag about because my qualifications are seen as completely worthless by NRoSO, NSTS, LOLER, HSE, etc. So don’t waste your time on an education, save your pennies for attending all the countless C and G modules all the annual CPD points win prices Mickey Mouse courses that make you truly qualified to do the job.

I doubt HSE would see your chartered status as 'worthless'. Nothing to stop you inspecting a neighbours kit and him (or her....) returning the favour. You just cant do your stuff.

 

[HatsOff]

In short because the HSE says so, this is taken from their ACOP and I've spent many a long hour discussing this with maintenance managers where I worked.

Basic premise is like spell checking your own work, you don't always spot your mistakes and (unbelievably) some people are just DODGY.

Bottom line is if something goes wrong and you have a proper TE, it's one less stick to beat you with and a useful mitigating factor 'the equipment was fully inspected and maintained your honour'.

Can you tell I have a background in defending civil claims ? Defending insurance claims was a huge learning curve but it can be done.

What is a 'competent person'?​

The term 'competent person' is not defined in law but the LOLER Approved Code of Practice and guidance (paragraph 296 on competent persons) states that:

'You should ensure that the person carrying out a thorough examination has such appropriate practical and theoretical knowledge and experience of the lifting equipment to be thoroughly examined as will enable them to detect defects or weaknesses and to assess their importance in relation to the safety and continued use of the lifting equipment.'

Although the competent person may often be employed by another organisation, this is not necessary, provided they are sufficiently independent and impartial to ensure that in-house examinations are made without fear or favour. However, this should not be the same person who undertakes routine maintenance of the equipment - as they would then be responsible for assessing their own maintenance work.

Although that is guidance and you don't have to follow guidance. But you'd better be damn sure it's done right and ideally have additional measures in place to check it's done right.

 

[Bobthebuilder]

Yes i would agree with that ref loader tractors and the Loler tests, insurance company's are pushing them like they are pushing for all trailers etc to be inspected yearly.

The problem is the money is not in the job to pay for all these checks/ tests etc

Be cheaper than the fine if there was an accident

 

[devonbeef]

Be cheaper than the fine if there was an accident

might be cheaper, but if there is not enough money to pay for all this inspections on older kit then all it will do is force many of us smaller guys out of business, we are not businesses with maintenance staff ,we do it ourselves because we need to make a small profit to live off at the end of it , or else we are finished . With a split farm using quiet lanes but need insurance i can see this finishing me, my kit is old ,safe but usable ,i drive and use it with common sense. Need 2 loaders on the road ,small trailers ,muckspreders etc if this all starts to become a must have inspection to be able to be insured on road then game over for me, So infact what is safe with a owner driver knowing what he is doing becomes illegal then all it will do is put businesses out of business. NUTS

 

[betweenthelines]

Agriculture isn’t one man per machine. Most days in the winter I am jumping between 4 different tractors scraper, feed wagon, loader tractor and straw blower tractor. How feasible would it be to do a 15 minute check on each per day? I really don’t see a milk buyer paying extra for milk to cover this? And none of these will be on the road unless a repair off farm is needed.

Do you not give each machine a visual check before you use it?

How many machines do you get breaking down while in use-say a hydraulic pipe bursts? The sort of thing you would have seen if you looked before using it?

What difference does it make if the kit goes on the road? Most farm accidents happen off the road.

I'm just saying a 3 or 4 minute look before use (if recorded) is a) good practice to avoid accidents, b) good practice to reduce breakdowns and c) good practice from a H&S point of view.

 

[kill]

Do you not give each machine a visual check before you use it?

How many machines do you get breaking down while in use-say a hydraulic pipe bursts? The sort of thing you would have seen if you looked before using it?

What difference does it make if the kit goes on the road? Most farm accidents happen off the road.

I'm just saying a 3 or 4 minute look before use (if recorded) is a) good practice to avoid accidents, b) good practice to reduce breakdowns and c) good practice from a H&S point of view.

My machines are normally parked on concrete so leaks are easy to spot and rectified quickly thanks. Oils to fudging dear .