Let’s get real, keeping equipment well-maintained comes at a cost and can be seen as a time constraint. The cost of regular inspections can encourage contractors to seek cheaper ways to get equipment ‘passed’. HSE state this can result in a ‘superficial tick-box approach or even, in some cases, the inspection activity ceasing altogether’.

Another reason the ‘tick-box’ attitude is if the criteria is not specific to the equipment being inspected. Conquip on-site engineers frequently find equipment that has been ‘checked’ or ‘passed’ by external companies, yet it fails our inspection. It highlights an issue of incompetency and prompts the question: If you are going to the trouble of inspecting whether a product is fit-for-use, why aim to simply just pass it without carrying out a proper inspection?

HSE did not put in place regulation to encourage people to just pay for a cheap inspection, so they have a piece of paper that allows them to continue using that equipment. All inspections should be based on how regularly you are using that piece of equipment - 6 months is a ‘guide’ and is a minimum requirement – in certain cases contractors have moved to more frequent inspection cycles, depending on the use of the equipment or site conditions.

Contractors should be taking a proactive approach to testing and certification, documenting the inspection schedule clearly in site-specific Risk Assessments and Method Statements (RAMS). The more organised the approach to inspection, the less last-minute inspections will be taking place when the site team realises that the QHSE representative from the principal contractor is on site tomorrow and there are items that are out of cert. These last-minute inspections are costly, so being organised will save you time and money.