Introduction to Health and Safety at Work

combined testing and inspection
should 
be carried out by a competent person either when there is 
reason to suspect the equipment may be faulty, damaged 
or contaminated, but this cannot be confi rmed by visual 
inspection or after any repair, modifi cation or similar work 
to the equipment, which could have affected its elec-
trical safety. The competent person could be a person 
who has been specifi cally trained to carry out the testing 
of portable appliances using a simple ‘pass/fail’ type 
of tester. When more sophisticated tests are required, 
a competent person with the necessary technical elec 
-
trical knowledge and experience would be needed. The 
inspection and testing should normally include the follow-
ing checks:
➤
that the polarity is correct
➤
that the correct fuses are being used
➤
that all cables and cores are effectively terminated
➤
that the equipment is suitable for its environment.
Testing need not be expensive in many low-risk premises 
like shops and offi ces, if an employee is trained to per-
form the tests and appropriate equipment is purchased.
12.7.3 Frequency of inspection and testing
The frequency of inspection and testing should be based 
on a risk assessment which is related to the usage, type 
and operational environment of the equipment. The 
harsher the working environment is, the more frequent 
the period of inspection. Thus tools used on a construc-
tion site should be tested much more frequently than 
a visual display unit which is never moved from a desk. 
Manufacturers or suppliers may recommend a suitable 
testing period. Table 12.1 lists the suggested intervals 
for inspection and testing derived from HSE publications 
Maintaining portable and transportable electrical equip-
ment
(HSG 107 and INDG 236 and 237).
It is very important to stress that there is no ‘correct’ 
interval for testing – it depends on the frequency of 
usage, type of equipment, how and where it is used. 
A few years ago, a young trainee was badly scalded by 
a boiling kettle of water which exploded while in use. 
On investigation, an inspection report indicated that the 
kettle had been checked by a competent person and 
passed just a few weeks before the accident. Further 
investigation showed that this kettle was the only method 
of boiling water on the premises and was in use continu-
ously for 24 hours each day. It was therefore unsuitable 
for the purpose and a plumbed-in continuous-use hot 
water heater would have been far more suitable.