Servicing and Electrical Safety

[frazer]

Hi there,

 

Just a quick question. If a piece of equipment was sent away for repair or a service and then shortly after it is returned that same piece of equipment was discovered to have an electrical fault that could prove dangerous... who would be ultimately responsible?

 

For example if one of the college movers had a faulty color wheel and it was then sent off for repair, should the repairer be qualified to ensure that is electrically safe before it is returned?

 

Frazer

 

EDITED: To make it say "Electrical Fault"

[gareth]

Tricky to answer without knowing more about the circumstances (and I get the impression from your post that we're not talking about a hypothetical case here!).

 

If you sent a moving light away for 'a service', then to my mind that covers making sure that it's in a safe and serviceable condition.

 

If, on the other hand, you sent it away specifically for a repair to the colour wheel, then perhaps that puts a whole other spin on it. You'd like to think that any competent service engineer, when they had finished the repair and powered the unit up for testing, would notice if there was anything electrically unsafe about it, and that they'd have a duty of care to make you aware of that.

 

My feeling is that if an electrical fault was present on the equipment when it went for the repair, even if the instructions you gave to the engineer specifically concerned only the colour wheel, they should've notified you of the problem and asked you if you wanted it repaired while the unit was on the bench. Failure to do so would probably be seen as negligence. Having said that, though, who's to say what's happened to the fixture in the time between it coming back from repair and the fault being noticed?

[Roderick]

... who would be ultimately responsible?

Whilst I can see where you are coming from, the ultimate responsibility would lay with the end user.

Although it may be difficult at times, whoever connects the unit to power should make sure it is safe to do so. In spite of popular belief, PAT testing is only an indication of the condition of the unit when it was tested, not a guarantee that it is safe to use at any time after the testing.

 

Could you let us know what the actual problem with the unit was? If it was wired incorrectly internally you may have a case of negligence against the service provider, if it was an external fault you have very little to go on.

[frazer]

Tricky to answer without knowing more about the circumstances (and I get the impression from your post that we're not talking about a hypothetical case here!).

 

 

Sorry, it is purely hypothetical. We have had our movers repaired in the past by an individual who has lot of knowledge about moving lights and their mechanics, but as far I know is not qualified to service electrical faults (or indeed able to return the unit with a guarantee that it is electrically safe to use)

 

Should in theory, equipment be Re-PAT tested after each repair?

[Ynot]

Should in theory, equipment be Re-PAT tested after each repair?

I would say yes, unless the service included a PAT as part of the work.

 

Remember that strictly speaking any item of hire gear (for example) should be given a suitable check on returnm from any booking - that may be a proper visual check or a full PAT depending on circumstances.

[Tomo]

should the repairer be qualified to ensure that is electrically safe before it is returned?

In a word, simply and unequivocally, YES

 

No matter what the repair is, the moment the case is off there is a significant chance that something may be either dropped into the unit, or something my be damaged, thus making the unit unsafe to use.

 

Unless the company doing the repair is qualified to test it afterwards, then they shouldn't be inside.

 

However, I don't see a reason why Person A couldn't do the repair, and then Person B check it over and do the electrical tests - in fact, that's probably the best way as it's very difficult to properly check your own work, as anybody who has tried proofreading will know!

[paulears]

Don't forget that in many busy services departments lots of jobs are done by unqualified people - in fact, this has always been the case, especially where apprentice type schemes were the norm. If the fault can be fixed by the most junior staff then they do it If they can't, it passes on up. So it is quite possible that a stuck colour wheel that is very obviously a loose grub screw, fixed with a hexkey, could be simply repaired, housing put back on, tested and returned. Lots of potential faults that didn't affect the test would not be spotted. Colour wheel re-tightened and tested would be scribbled on the job sheet and back it goes - UNLESS you had specifically requested a safety test. After all, you will pay for these extra items to be done - they won't be free if they take time.

 

I would think that it isn't unreasonable for the service company to simple state that they were carrying out the customers instructions. If, of course, a potential risk was very evident when they opened it up, then they would bring it to your attention and of course, make a bit more - something they would all want to do.

 

If you take your car in to have the oil changed, would you expect them to check your rear brake cylinders?