Loler inspections

[frederick]

LOLER is specifically for lifting equipment such a tail lifts on lorries.

Tractor 3pl, tractor FEL, tipping trailers etc are part of the machine and daily inspections (like you all do!) will cover them.

Most LOLER inspections are not a legal requirement but are insisted on by insurers.

I think your wrong on legal requirement. Loler is a statutory regulation just like ssafo.

I am getting somewhere now and my consultant has gone out the yard with enough pushback from me to look at it further and as others have said Loler is necessary to operate anything with an SWL. A telehandler will come with one and a fel can have it's worked out from the manual.

At no point do the regulations excuse agriculture.

 

[HatsOff]

LOLER is specifically for lifting equipment such a tail lifts on lorries.

Tractor 3pl, tractor FEL, tipping trailers etc are part of the machine and daily inspections (like you all do!) will cover them.

Most LOLER inspections are not a legal requirement but are insisted on by insurers.

Front loaders are included. Tipping trailers I think aren't because that's not the primary purpose of the machine.

The law as ever, is a bit crafty. If you have the necessary competence you could do the thorough examination yourself. But I think it'd be hard to demonstrate your independence from yourself! But as you say, the legal minimum standard is irrelevant because your insurer would never accept it.

 

[Farmer_Joe]

I would be very interested in how you justify the loader not needing an annual Loler. My insurance company insists it does.

The HSE regulations are quite clear and appear to be on his side not mine

LOLER (the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations) apply to any lifting equipment used at work - including employees' own lifting equipment - for lifting or lowering loads, including attachments used for anchoring, fixing or supporting it.

Let me guess nfu,

I asked them if it was mandatory and really pushed them then they said not, I believe the get commission hence the push.

as I understand it’s not an insurance requirement mines certainly never asked.

the on forum insurer nigel confirmed this very recently

 

[Bobthebuilder]

If you had an accident with a forklift and hurt or killed someone and it didn't have a loler certificate I wouldn't fancy your chances in court even if insurance company said you didn't need 1, HSE would rip you to pieces

 

[s~~t shoveller]

If you had an accident with a forklift and hurt or killed someone and it didn't have a loler certificate I wouldn't fancy your chances in court even if insurance company said you didn't need 1, HSE would rip you to pieces

Would it not depend if the accident was caused by your neglicence regardless of ticket or not?to mean that if it wasn’t a mechanical issue that caused the accident then surely loler would make no difference anyway.its often operator error

 

[mengeleguru]

As I understand it a loader can be fitted to more than one tractor and is removable so doesn’t need a test because the test only applies to the tractor it was fitted to at the time , if it needed one anyway.

 

[farmerm]

If you had an accident with a forklift and hurt or killed someone and it didn't have a loler certificate I wouldn't fancy your chances in court even if insurance company said you didn't need 1, HSE would rip you to pieces

If you have an accident they will find some way of getting you, certificate or not.

 

[Blue.]

As I understand it a loader can be fitted to more than one tractor and is removable so doesn’t need a test because the test only applies to the tractor it was fitted to at the time , if it needed one anyway.

It clearly says foreloader need loler testing https://www.hse.gov.uk/agriculture/topics/maintenance-4.htm
Foreloaders don’t need a swl marking.

I’m not sure if this has always been the case,I don’t know of anyone having a loler test on a foreloader.

 

[Blue.]

If you have an accident they will find some way of getting you, certificate or not.

Two fatalities with loadalls I know of both drivers ended up in prison,loler didn’t come into it.

 

[Lakesdigger]

Ready to be proved wrong but loler req will depend on what the machine is doing. A digger doesn't need loler for digging with a bucket but does if you hang a chain from it or use pallet forks on the end of the arm for a "lifting operation".
A telehandler with a bucket loading wagons from a stockpile doesn't need loler inspection as far as I'm aware but if you load the bucket with bricks to put up on a scaffold it would. I think a lot of loler req depends upon whether there are people on the ground or in the vicinity working at risk of something goes wrong. Realistically a tractor and loader shouldn't need loler as there should never be anyone in the vicinity of it when its carrying any load.
As is usual there are too many who see a money making scheme to be exploited and others who don't know enough (NFU etc) so think it best to cover themselves by making everyone think they need it.

 

[Blue.]

Ready to be proved wrong but loler req will depend on what the machine is doing. A digger doesn't need loler for digging with a bucket but does if you hang a chain from it or use pallet forks on the end of the arm for a "lifting operation".
A telehandler with a bucket loading wagons from a stockpile doesn't need loler inspection as far as I'm aware but if you load the bucket with bricks to put up on a scaffold it would. I think a lot of loler req depends upon whether there are people on the ground or in the vicinity working at risk of something goes wrong. Realistically a tractor and loader shouldn't need loler as there should never be anyone in the vicinity of it when its carrying any load.
As is usual there are too many who see a money making scheme to be exploited and others who don't know enough (NFU etc) so think it best to cover themselves by making everyone think they need it.

Frequently asked questions – Construction - Excavators and LOLER

The Health and Safety Executive's (HSE) information and advice for frequently asked questions on scaffolding

www.hse.gov.uk

 

[DrWazzock]

Honestly chaps, better stay in bed. Its getting to the point where I can’t really do much at all without being sued or imprisoned, all because of the HSE, legal profession, insurance company sharkpool merry go round.

 

[Bert Jansch]

Two fatalities with loadalls I know of both drivers ended up in prison,loler didn’t come into it.

And if one of them is the same person as I’m thinking of, prison didn’t teach him any sense.

 

[robs1]

Honestly chaps, better stay in bed. Its getting to the point where I can’t really do much at all without being sued or imprisoned, all because of the HSE, legal profession, insurance company sharkpool merry go round.

I think this thread shows that no one, including the HSE know exactly what needs what, they just make bland statements. In the link put up they say lifting equipment needs marking with a swl, then it's says handlers might need one depending on configuration and further down it says fire loaders don't, yet when mine was tested many years ago it failed because it didn't have one.
Basically any small business will be f**ked over by the HSE, courts and insurance companies as we don't have the resources to fight their
" interpretation" of the rules

 

[ollie989898]

When in the history of insurance companies ever are they going to back-track or rescind the recommendation to do something however weakly related to safety it may be? It just won't happen. To them, anything which might reduce risk, however little that may be, is a good thing.

Are you all going to get your top links, linkage pins and lynch pins officially tested and examined by ultrasound annually then? Where do you stop?

LOLER- jacks, car lifts, anything with a man attached or stood on it, telehandler etc, fair enough. Also give the pallet forks a look over whilst doing so. Fair enough. Can't argue with that. But where do you stop?

 

[Nigel Wellings]

It is not insurance companies that insist on Loler or Puwer certificates. We as independent Brokers recommend people have such tests done basically to cover your own back in the event of an accident and because we believe it is the law. I have never been asked by an Insurer if a machine has a Loler or Puwer cert- must of them wouldnt know what the heck it was!

 

[FarmyStu]

As far as I know (and various HSE leaflets and web pages say the same) there is NO requirement to have a telehandler/tractor loader LOLER tested if nobody is in danger in the event of failure. So if this is you then don't bother with LOLER. You will never have an accident, as nobody is ever in danger, so you don't need to worry about what happens in court, as the scenario never transpires. But if you do have a loader related accident that injures/kills someone, and you're not LOLER, then you have no defense.

In my experience, every type of farm loader handles loads around and above people at some point. So LOLER applies.

 

[Hesstondriver]

FEL inspection yesterday by Vulcan on behalf of NFU ,

SWL has always been put down as n/a . yesterday he was keen to put one down and asked if there was in the book - 'out of interest'

certificate has appeared today with that SWL used .

so do i push back on this ??

 

[vantage]

This morning we have had our 6 month Health and safety consultant visit.

We got on to Loler inspections. We have the two loaders independently inspected annually and accept that I'm in a grey area when I inspect the man cage and loaders for their 6 month competent person inspection.

I also accept that harnesses and lifting straps need regular inspection. We then moved onto pallet forks, he regarded they needed annual inspection, so I then ask about buckets, sheargrabs, bale squeezers and he decides they lift so Loler. Then looked at sand dispenser on back of tractor Loler lifts sand. The three point linkage is also Loler. Then he decided the hedgecutter is Loler because that is lifting the head and therefore the frame needs to be inspected 12 monthly.

He also stated that under Loler if a handler is 3 tons under its Loler testing it needs to demonstrate that it can hold 3 tons for a period of time.

I dont disagree that on a building site or in a warehouse this maybe how Loler should be applied. Im just wondering if anyone is taking it any further than simply testing the telehandler or loader and how far they go. Has anyone ever considered that a tractors three point linkage is Loler. If its not technically Loler what is the reason.

The chap that was coming here tests dentists chairs and hospital beds, the scope of the regulations is HUGE

 

[Ducati899]

This morning we have had our 6 month Health and safety consultant visit.

We got on to Loler inspections. We have the two loaders independently inspected annually and accept that I'm in a grey area when I inspect the man cage and loaders for their 6 month competent person inspection.

I also accept that harnesses and lifting straps need regular inspection. We then moved onto pallet forks, he regarded they needed annual inspection, so I then ask about buckets, sheargrabs, bale squeezers and he decides they lift so Loler. Then looked at sand dispenser on back of tractor Loler lifts sand. The three point linkage is also Loler. Then he decided the hedgecutter is Loler because that is lifting the head and therefore the frame needs to be inspected 12 monthly.

He also stated that under Loler if a handler is 3 tons under its Loler testing it needs to demonstrate that it can hold 3 tons for a period of time.

I dont disagree that on a building site or in a warehouse this maybe how Loler should be applied. Im just wondering if anyone is taking it any further than simply testing the telehandler or loader and how far they go. Has anyone ever considered that a tractors three point linkage is Loler. If it’s not technically Loler what is the reason.

They’ve looked at our shear bucket and pallet forks on the last 4 maybe 5 inspections,not once have they asked to look at the dung grab bucket or bale squeezer and grab that are all dropped off in the same line