PAT Testing Equipment

[Tigercubrider]

Previous job involved testing tons of stuff that was class 1 and long leads.
We used a Robin dedicated machine that scanned barcodes and recorded the results.
The results were downloaded and to be honest never really looked at again.
obviously visual checks as well.

The stuff I do now is far more ad hoc although I do tons of class 2 AV equipment and random stuff that has no known history.

I don't know if expecting tenants to PAT private equipment in a home is a wise choice?

 

[pcaouolte]

I don't know if expecting tenants to PAT private equipment in a home is a wise choice?

I think that there is a risk that the landlord becomes aware that a tenant has potentially unsafe equipment in the property but is unable to do anything about it because the equipment is owned by the tenant. Does the landlord then bear some responsibility for the continued use of that equipment? Would the landlord actually be in a better position if they were not aware of the potentially unsafe equipment?

In a private home there are likely to be several items of equipment which wont pass a PAT test, potentially the kettle (they often fail), Christmas tree lights, Chinese chargers, two core extension leads with three pin sockets on the end etc. It seems very intrusive for a landlord to insist on testing tenants private equipment, some of which could be of a personal hygiene nature.

 

[oldbutnotdead]

I think that there is a risk that the landlord becomes aware that a tenant has potentially unsafe equipment in the property but is unable to do anything about it because the equipment is owned by the tenant. Does the landlord then bear some responsibility for the continued use of that equipment? Would the landlord actually be in a better position if they were not aware of the potentially unsafe equipment?

In a private home there are likely to be several items of equipment which wont pass a PAT test, potentially the kettle (they often fail), Christmas tree lights, Chinese chargers, two core extension leads with three pin sockets on the end etc. It seems very intrusive for a landlord to insist on testing tenants private equipment, some of which could be of a personal hygiene nature.

In a domestic AST setup, the landlord cannot randomly wander into the rented premises- they have to give notice. And it would be deemed intrusive if such visits were too frequent (6 monthly would be reasonable unless anything has happened that made more frequent inspections desirable- wilful damage, rubbish in the garden/front yard, that sort of stuff)
Anyway, if during such an inspection visit an obviously damaged or dangerous bit of kit (mangled extension lead, melted plug or something like) was in clear view then the landlord MIGHT be held responsible for its condition, more so if it was an item owned by the landlord (appropriate response in that case- remove or disconnect item, advise against use, repair/replace asap).
Tenants property- all the landlord can do is advise them not to use it. In both scenarios your wise landlord would document (pics) the item & send written confirmation of whatever the recommended action was.
Stuff the tenant has stashed away- their problem. No reasonable landlord would be expected to search cupboards, drawers etc looking for something like that. Ditto the tenants shoddy 2 core extension with 3 pin plugs and sockets- at their risk entirely.

 

[ericmark]

I have adaptors which have no integral fuse, and no shutters, always used in a extension lead so there is a fuse in the extension lead, and only by me, so they do not present a danger to me, but could if used by others. So would fail a PAT test. I suppose even a class II table lamp without the sticker and metal parts would need to fail, as one does not know if class II or a class I with two core lead.

I have lamp holders with the class II sticker on them, but they are fitted to a lamp which is metal and not class II, so even with the sticker, it would still fail if no earth. The one I remember is a mag mount drill where the drill was class II but the mag mount was class I but had been tested as class II due to label on the drill.

It is bad enough when the firm you work for owned them, but if the belong to a tenant it would be very hard to say you can't use these. For all you know may not even be owned by the tenant, could easy be a borrowed item. I would not want to PAT test any items owned by tenant, as you simply have no control.

 

[oldbutnotdead]

I have adaptors which have no integral fuse, and no shutters, always used in a extension lead so there is a fuse in the extension lead, and only by me, so they do not present a danger to me, but could if used by others. So would fail a PAT test. I suppose even a class II table lamp without the sticker and metal parts would need to fail, as one does not know if class II or a class I with two core lead.

I have lamp holders with the class II sticker on them, but they are fitted to a lamp which is metal and not class II, so even with the sticker, it would still fail if no earth. The one I remember is a mag mount drill where the drill was class II but the mag mount was class I but had been tested as class II due to label on the drill.

It is bad enough when the firm you work for owned them, but if the belong to a tenant it would be very hard to say you can't use these. For all you know may not even be owned by the tenant, could easy be a borrowed item. I would not want to PAT test any items owned by tenant, as you simply have no control.

Agreed. Completely different scenario to a workplace.