Browsing through t'internet on the crapper like I do, I thought I'd look as dses.uk and noticed he had a section on condemning/isolating unsafe works and how we have no legal power to do so (unlike GasSafe et all who apparently do (Gas Act?).
Got me thinking surely we do have a legal obligation to isolate/lock-off or otherwise make-safe dangerous works? Much like how if a car goes for an MOT it shouldn't leave the test centre if it fails anpt on safety critical devices (brakes/seatbelt).
Sure you can try and palm off your obligations on paper i.e "I advised me Smith that the Installation should not be used, the Installation was de-energised but no lockouts were installed because we have no legal right to do so" but I really can't see that holding water in court - I could be wrong?
C1s are another, given the severity of them surely if it requires locking off until it can be fixed then the spark has the right to do so (but not hold the client to random to guarantee they get the work)?
What's the offical lines? EAWR/HASAWA stipulation?
Got me thinking surely we do have a legal obligation to isolate/lock-off or otherwise make-safe dangerous works? Much like how if a car goes for an MOT it shouldn't leave the test centre if it fails anpt on safety critical devices (brakes/seatbelt).
Sure you can try and palm off your obligations on paper i.e "I advised me Smith that the Installation should not be used, the Installation was de-energised but no lockouts were installed because we have no legal right to do so" but I really can't see that holding water in court - I could be wrong?
C1s are another, given the severity of them surely if it requires locking off until it can be fixed then the spark has the right to do so (but not hold the client to random to guarantee they get the work)?
What's the offical lines? EAWR/HASAWA stipulation?
