PAT Test Fail?

The fool that passed this 4.8KW(!) glass washer would have just slapped a pass sticker on that, though he wouldn't have bothered unwinding it...
It was 'tested' by the same company who fitted those 2 poorly installed Wylex DBs I posted earlier. Yes that is 4.0mm² flex rammed into a broken 13A plug. The 20A MCB feeding the sockets ended up being continually overloaded which caused the MCB to jam, later heavier overloads then caused the MCB and DB to start melting. The MCB mechanism was totally jammed and even forcing the dolly to the off position didn't open the contacts. But don't worry, the same company passed tha

I had a large storeroom of cleaning quipment PAT tested recently, all passed and had test labels dated and signed off not one item had a plug fitted,
How can you say "No" all electrical equipment needs inspection and testing.

The clue is it the title, as they say. PORTABLE Appliance Testing………………
This will run for days………….:D

DS

I am just of to PAT test a burglar alarm panel :ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
We still call the testing of a car it's MOT, the Ministry of transport became the Department of the Environment and then the Department for Transport but it is still known as a MOT we don't call it a DFTT or Department for transport test.

It is the same with a PAT test, we don't call it "Inspection and testing of in service electrical equipment" and we don't call it a PA test, as in full a PAT test would be a "Portable appliance test test" and we are not testing the test.

Some times we do change the name a PIR became an EICR but since PIR also means passive inferred I can see reason for change. But an IATOISEE is rather a mouth full, I can see why we call it PAT testing even if it is not really the correct name.

I will admit I have seen arguments for not testing items over 28 lbs in weight and without wheels which is what is defined as portable, but the batching plant had something like 50 wheels, and was portable even if it required 22 attic units to move it. Clearly not going to be tested as a single item at £2 each.

I have in the past seen where two firms were employed one to PAT test and one to do a PIR as it was then, neither tested the larger items of plant, both considered they were down to other firm to test. Only when something went wrong did the manager find out the items had run for years without being tested.

Names do change, we now actually refer to microwave detectors, we did call then RADAR which was technically wrong as it did not work out the range, and now switch mode power supplies are being called pulse width modulated power supplies. Not a clue why new name.

Clearly a firm can be contracted to test only hand portable devices. We would need to call it "hand" portable to show it did not include batching plants, washing machines, tumble driers, fridges, TV's, but even then you have the problem with items which are hand portable but not hand tools. Is that photostat machine under 28 pounds?

As to class III should we PAT test all the mobile phones, PDA's, Ipads, etc. And what would the test involve? Should we be testing battery chargers don't over charge? I know one firm I worked for asked for the plant list of items to be tested, but in real terms that was a pain, we would always need to write the letter, saying the following items could not be found for their test and inspection. Anyway I am now going to PAT test my watch I missed it last time!
 
I wonder how many people were killed or injured by portable electrical appliances before PAT testing became a required thing, and I wonder how the figures compare afterwards.
I also wonder how the people who are (perhaps!) protected at work by all this testing get on when they go home, and, horror of horrors are exposed to the dangers of their own kettles, hairdryers, and toasters.
I think that is a very good point. In days gone by we looked after our own safety, and did not rely on a label to say safe to use. I had a discussion about grinders, two issues, one if it is electrical safe, but dangerous to use, should it get a green PASS sticker, since I was not authorised to fit abrasive wheels, I could not fit a new wheel guard, as the wheel needed removing to fit the guard. But the guard was not electrical, so should it be even in my remit?
The switch on the new grinders we had could be latched on, but the grinder was over 0.37 kW where it is required with loss of power it should not restart one return of power. OK with bench grinders using an active RCD makes them comply, but with hand held angle grinders, or even a simple drill often over the 0.37 kW. However "This requirement does not apply to a motor incorporated in an item of current-using equipment complying as a whole with an appropriate British Standard.", but how do you know if that is the case? My electric drill does not have any BS number on it, and remember "British Standard" not EU standard so CE marked is not good enough.

I am sure you don't need to be an electrician to work out melted cable should not be used. I remember being given a questionnaire before being allowed to work on site, it asked if you find a damaged cable on a hand tool should you.
A) Put it back and get another instead.
B) Put some insulation tape on it first.
C) Get your mate to use it instead.
D) Report it to foreman.
No where did it give the option, enter on the quarantine register, then when time permits replace the cable, then PAT test, and put back on the in service register. Being pedantic I wrote non of the above, and I was asked what I would do, to which I answered enter in to quarantine register and put in quarantine, at which he asked are you the electrician.

I think before we had the regulations we were more careful, we now have that attitude it must be safe or we would not be allowed to do it. Sticking a PASS sticker on a grinder with a broken wheel even if electrical safe to me is wrong.
 
Sponsored Links
I think you're right Eric. The onus (or at least some of it) should be on the user to ensure the equipment is visually OK, assuming that any equipment reported faulty is exchanged for repair or repaired. The user should be trained accordingly.
Electrical tests on portable kit, or anything else for that matter, only prove that it is OK at the time of testing, nothing else.
I've repaired any number of hand held nibbler shears for sheet, as well as drills, grinders, welders and other stuff. Most were brought in by the users for damaged cables. Failures of the electrical part of the machines themselves were remarkably rare as well as being (seemingly at least) random.
The blokes involved knew not to use kit that had obvious faults.
You have to wonder about the logic behind (some) testing. Probably dreamed up by a committee of scientists and bureaucrats who have never worked in "real world" situations.
You stick a nice green sticker on, and fill in the form in quadruplicate and it's safe until the next test!
I'd agree with the point about a grinder with a broken wheel as well. We used to take the often horribly abused nibblers, replace any broken parts, and replace and reset the blades as well as electrical repairs. I used to collect the really broken ones and strip them for spares to make up decent ones from them.
 
We still call the testing of a car it's MOT, the Ministry of transport became the Department of the Environment and then the Department for Transport but it is still known as a MOT we don't call it a DFTT or Department for transport test.
Not the same.
It was, correctly, an MOT Test.
It could now be DOE Test but nobody bothers.

The same would be an MOTT Test or DOET Test.

It is the same with a PAT test,
No, it isn't.
we don't call it "Inspection and testing of in service electrical equipment" and we don't call it a PA test, as in full a PAT test would be a "Portable appliance test test" and we are not testing the test.
So - it's wrong then

So is PIN Number.

Some times we do change the name a PIR became an EICR but since PIR also means passive inferred I can see reason for change. But an IATOISEE is rather a mouth full, I can see why we call it PAT testing even if it is not really the correct name.
It (the PIR - PI Report (not PIR Report)) was unlikely to be confused with a sensor on the wall.
Now we can confuse it with an EIC - another piece of paper with writing.
 
We don't sit a PAT testing exam, the exam is called "Inspecting and testing of in service electrical equipment" as you know the exam is in two parts the testing and the management of the testing. Where our job is purely the testing I will admit we can opt to only test equipment which our PAT tester is able to test. This was the way we did it in many firms I have worked for, nothing to do with being portable it was simply using a PAT tester is far easier than using a insulation and continuity tester to do it all manually.

It is up to the manager to allocate who tests what. He it able to take our maintenance contracts on vending machines, or other items where to test needs some dismantling of the appliance.

Where as electrician we have taken on the management as well, then we have to ensure everything is tested. Be that write a letter to the firm recommending that maintenance contracts are taken out on machines you name, or you test them your self, it really does not matter, but you as the manager must take steps to ensure the items are tested.

The Robin tester I used allowed one to write your own test sequence, and I did write specials. One thing the tester would not test is the RCD plug, and I always took the RCD tester with me to test the plugs on long leads which were too long for the earth loop impedance to pass otherwise.

One problem was where there is general RCD protection, can't test the plug, but it is OK where tested, so as such it should PASS. However move it to some where without general RCD testing and it may FAIL. It again is down to the manager to decide if items can be moved. In the main extension leads should only be used as a temporary basis so easy method is to require them to be take to workshop for testing.
 
We don't sit a PAT testing exam, the exam is called "Inspecting and testing of in service electrical equipment"
Actually, the Code of Practice (and exam and everything else) is called "In-service Inspection & Testing of Electrical Equipment".
 
Well let's liven up this thread with some appliances that received a little red sticker.
Danger vacuum a.JPG
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top