Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 33 replies
  • Subscribers 45 subscribers
  • Views 5894 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Imposed code 2

lyledunn

A contractor gave a code 3 to an outside socket located on the exterior wooden balcony of a first floor restaurant which was only used for Xmas tree. Reason no additional protection. He was subsequently subject to NICEIC assessment the outcome of which required him to re-visit his client, withdraw the satisfactory report and amend it with a code 2 thereby resulting in the report having unsatisfactory designation. To add insult to injury, he was required to confirm he had carried out that instruction by writing to NICEIC head office. This he obediently did. I am afraid I may have taken a more belligerent stance!

Parents
  • Chris Pearson said:
    When would this socket have been compliant?

    Being a place of work, not that clear cut. Was/is there a risk assessment in place ? If so, potentially very recently. Not commenting on whether I would or would personally agree with that risk assessment (and would that matter?) ... but it's a possibility.

    Chris Pearson said:
    Does the repeated non-compliance (assuming regular I&T) matter?

    Perhaps, in reality, this is a question for the duty holder of the premises, it being a place of work. It's really their responsibility.

    Then again, it's recommended to review risk assessments and provisions for safety when conditions change, however - as well as changes in  legislation, this includes changes in standards and technology, as these may well affect what is considered 'reasonably practicable', 'reasonably foreseeable', etc.

Reply
  • Chris Pearson said:
    When would this socket have been compliant?

    Being a place of work, not that clear cut. Was/is there a risk assessment in place ? If so, potentially very recently. Not commenting on whether I would or would personally agree with that risk assessment (and would that matter?) ... but it's a possibility.

    Chris Pearson said:
    Does the repeated non-compliance (assuming regular I&T) matter?

    Perhaps, in reality, this is a question for the duty holder of the premises, it being a place of work. It's really their responsibility.

    Then again, it's recommended to review risk assessments and provisions for safety when conditions change, however - as well as changes in  legislation, this includes changes in standards and technology, as these may well affect what is considered 'reasonably practicable', 'reasonably foreseeable', etc.

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines