Are all EV charge point installers this bad?

[Mike Johnson]

Which is the ideal (if infrequent) situation.

Can't agree with that, it is either carried out correctly to leave a paper trail that can be followed, or just ignored or carried out incorrectly, in most industries where Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessments are carried out on a regular basis that trail is essential to comply with Health and Safety legislation.

It is often quoted on this forum about standing in the dock answering the questions from the judge, how do you prove you carried out your obligations in accordance with the regulations, the same applies to Health and Safety, can't have it that way for one piece of legislation and not for others.

 

[nicebutdim]

Can't agree with that, it is either carried out correctly to leave a paper trail that can be followed, or just ignored or carried out incorrectly, in most industries where Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessments are carried out on a regular basis that trial is essential to comply with Health and Safety legislation.

It is often quoted on this forum about standing in the dock answering the questions from the judge, how do you prove you carried out your obligations in accordance with the regulations, the same applies to Health and Safety, can't have it the one way for one piece of legislation and not for others.

Not sure if I worded the last post badly, but I was expressing the opinion that (in my experience) it is rare that hazards can be eliminated. I work extensively in a particularly 'risk averse' industry and have yet to see a permit issued on the basis that all hazards have been eliminated. The simplest job requires a risk assessment and without that no permit will be issued for work to be carried out.

 

[Mike Johnson]

This is were it all gets a bit confusing for most people, if the Hazard has been eliminated a permit is not needed and therefore the trail would not be visible, the simplest job requires a Hazard analysis first.

 

[mainline]

This is were it all gets a bit confusing for most people, if the Hazard has been eliminated a permit is not needed and therefore the trail would not be visible, the simplest job requires a Hazard analysis first.

Yes you're right, this is getting a bit confusing because on the one hand you say if no Hazard then no risk assessment is required and would leave no paper trail.

Then you say Risk assessments are essential to comply with HSL, and go on to say

“It is either carried out correctly to leave a paper trail that can be followed, or just ignored or carried out incorrectly”

“That trail is essential to comply with Health and Safety legislation.”

It is often quoted on this forum about standing in the dock answering the questions from the judge, how do you prove you carried out your obligations in accordance with the regulations, the same applies to Health and Safety, can't have it that way for one piece of legislation and not for others.”




I can't think of any scenario that wouldn't have some sort of hazard.

Risk assessments are a legal requirement. At least, they are a legal requirement at work. In fact, risk assessment is so important it has its own section under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations.

 

[Mike Johnson]

It is quite a simple process, if you believe a Hazard exists then an Analysis should be done, if at the conclusion of this Analysis this conclusion is the Hazard has been eliminated then no further measures are required, if however the conclusion is the second measure of "Control at source" then a Risk Assessment should be carried out to specify that "Control" can't remember the order of the third and forth measures order, but PPE is one of the lower ones and if I remember correctly the last is "Prepare a Method Statement" the Hazard Analysis process is judged by Likelihood/Risk with a High/Medium/Low probability under each section, if you don't understand this process perhaps some training is required.

Since the introduction of the Health and Safety Regulations in 1974 there have been numerous additions and refinements to the process including the "Construction Design and Management" regulations, updated twice since their introduction, these CDM regulations put the onus on designers to eliminate risk.