Author Bio ▼

Safety and Health Practitioner (SHP) is first for independent health and safety news.
May 2, 2012

Get the SHP newsletter

Daily health and safety news, job alerts and resources

HSE: Don’t waste money on unnecessary PAT tests

The HSE has issued revised guidance on electrical equipment checks and is urging businesses not to be fooled into paying for testing that is not required.

Unnecessary electrical safety tests cost office-based businesses an estimated £30 million a year, but it’s a myth that every portable electrical appliance in the workplace needs to be tested once a year.

According to the safety watchdog, misleading advice and advertising – often, by companies who offer the testing – is contributing to low-risk businesses, such as offices, shops and hotels, paying unnecessarily for excessive maintenance regimes.

The message from the HSE is that employers need only ensure that electrical equipment is maintained in order to prevent danger – as the law does not stipulate that every item has to be tested, or how often testing needs to be carried out.

While the testing of appliances can contribute to an effective maintenance regime, in a low-risk environment most dangerous defects can be identified simply by checking the devices for obvious signs of damage, such as frayed cables, advises the Executive.

Launching the revised guidance on portable appliance testing (PAT), HSE chair Judith Hackitt said: “Businesses are responsible for protecting their employees, but they shouldn’t be wasting their money on unnecessary checks that have no real benefit.

“HSE has always advocated a proportionate, risk-based approach to maintenance. This new guidance is simple and clear to follow.”

The guidance has been revised in response to Professor Löfstedt’s independent report on health and safety legislation, which concluded that the legal requirements concerning maintenance of electrical appliances were “applied too widely and disproportionately”, resulting in costly over-compliance.

Nick Starling, director of general insurance at the Association of British Insurers, added: “Insurers have never required policy-holders to undertake unnecessary portable electrical appliance tests that are not proportionate to the risk.

“We welcome HSE’s guidance, which will help businesses focus on what they do best, free from worries about health and safety myths.”

The guidance, Maintaining portable electrical equipment in low-risk environments, is available at www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg236.pdf

Download: April 2020 Legislation Update

Coronavirus has become a top priority for employers all over the world. The pandemic event is putting pressure on already stretched employers to do more to keep up to date and protect the health, safety and welfare of their employees. Download this free legislation update to understand all the latest guidelines, laws and regulations. The eBook covers:

  • Coronavirus legislation;
  • Brexit;
  • Grenfell;
  • Changes to workplace exposure limits;
  • Key cases in recent months;
  • Environment and Energy;
  • and much more…
April 2020 Legislation eBook

Related Topics

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
8 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Alexhoward_121
Alexhoward_121
8 years ago

Hurrah! Well done HSE!

I hope this gudance will help put an end to the ‘predatory ‘ PAT testing gravy train.

Yes, of course it’s all about balanced risk! A drill, or breaker used daily on-site will need a visual check before every use and PAT valid for 3mths. Wheras, a mobile phone charger in an office would only need visual checks and its PAT valid for 5 yrs. Yes, clearly if something is damaged, replace or don’t use it.

Will we ever read about INDG236 in the tabloids? – Nah!

Alexhoward_121
Alexhoward_121
8 years ago

Insurance companies are not out there to look after us! They are multi £million businesses that want to reduce thier liabilitie as much as possible, less claims = more profit!
They try never to pay out if they can; hence annual PAT etc.
I took one insurer to task when they said that I had no record of maintenance for a simple blocked drain & refused to settle the claim for it to be unblocked. Payment by return of post when I asked for evidence of thier records for thier own buildings drains!

Andrew
Andrew
8 years ago

Visual check only on the phone charger. The output is ~10V; you wouldn’t even feel it. And would it still be in service after 5 years?
Same with most IT; who’s got equipment >5 years old? PAT on resale; yes, there’s an obvious duty of care/produc t liability point.
If it don’t move; visual check only.
My wife on the other hand is toxic to laptop chargers, having got through 3 in 4 1/2 years!

Doug
Doug
8 years ago

Ray
HSE deserves the credit for publishing sensible guidance on this issue16 years ago, well before Lofstedt. But guidance on its own is clearly not enough. The problem with portable appliance testing is that there are too few inspectors in HSE and Local Authorities so the low risk businesses never got a vist from an inspector to advise them. I don’t understand why Trading Standards have never prosecuted for mis-selling PAT.

Filberton
Filberton
8 years ago

Why annual PAT? did someone say referral fee?
Mr electrician to insurance company
“If you make annual PAT testing a mandatory policy requirement I’ll get loads of work, I’ll earn loads of cash so can give you a bung of £££”.

Mr Insurance company to electrician
“costs me nowt but I’ll get a wedge…done mate” (and so is the poor policy holder!!)

Most folk when asked say annual PAT testing is a requirement of their insurance policy.

Mark
Mark
8 years ago

To be fair to the HSE this new guidance isnt massively different from the previous guidance.

Essentially the belief that it is a legal requirement to PAT every item was created by dodgy companies making upwards of £1.50 per item on unneccessary testing. I receive a couple of the sales calls per month that quote me regulations, so they get both barrels.

Ray
Ray
8 years ago

Hurrah! Why did it take so long HSE?

Can’t give the HSE too much credit, after all, it was prompted by Prof Lofstedt’s report. Still, well over due and something which I have argued for a long time.

Ray
Ray
8 years ago

Doug

Thanks for the info, I assumed the PAT guidance was a recent HSE document. If it has been around so long then I’m amazed that no one has talen any notice of it. I don’t subscribe to the lack of inspections to publicise the PAT issues is a valid excuse. These practices have been on going for years…the HSE have other mediums at their disposal to advise and educate.

I agree that Trading Standards should have been more proactive, but then they probably were unaware of the issues.

 

 

Help Us Improve Your Experience

Take Our Survey