The short answer
A competent person for LOLER is someone with enough practical and theoretical knowledge and experience of the equipment to find defects and judge how serious they are. They must also be independent and impartial, which in practice means they should not examine equipment they maintain. They can be in-house or from an outside firm.
On this page
Regulation 9 of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 says thorough examinations must be carried out by a “competent person”. The regulations do not define the term, and there is no single licence or register that makes someone a LOLER examiner. That leaves the decision with you, the duty holder, so it is worth knowing what the law and HSE guidance expect.
What competence means here
HSE’s Approved Code of Practice, L113, describes the competent person as someone with appropriate practical and theoretical knowledge and experience of the lifting equipment to be examined. That has to be enough to:
- find defects or weaknesses in the equipment;
- judge how important they are to the continued safe use of the equipment;
- decide whether tests are needed, and what kind;
- set the latest date for the next examination, or draw up a written scheme.
Competence is specific to the equipment. Someone well qualified to examine forklifts may not be competent to examine a passenger lift, a tower crane or a patient hoist. Ask what equipment the examiner deals with week in, week out.
Independence matters as much as knowledge
L113 says the competent person should be sufficiently independent and impartial to make objective decisions. The usual test is simple: the person examining the equipment should not be the person who maintains it, because they would be judging their own work.
This does not mean a maintenance company can never do examinations. Many firms that service equipment also employ examiners. What matters is that the examiner on your job is separate from the engineer who services it, and is free to fail an item without pressure.
In-house or outside?
| In-house competent person | Outside examiner | |
|---|---|---|
| Allowed? | Yes, if competent and impartial | Yes |
| Typical users | Large estates, ports, utilities, the NHS | Most small and medium organisations |
| Main risk | Showing impartiality when managers want kit back in use | Variable quality between firms |
| Records | Your own systems | Reports from the firm, often through an online portal |
Most organisations use an outside examiner. It is easier to show independence, and the examiner sees far more equipment than an in-house person could. Many employers use the engineer surveyors provided through their engineering insurance policy, others contract an independent inspection firm or a specialist in their type of equipment.
What to ask before you book
About the person
- What equipment do you examine most often, and have you examined this make and model?
- What training and qualifications do you hold? Engineering qualifications and membership of a professional or trade body are common.
- Are you independent of the people who maintain this equipment?
About the firm
- Do you hold professional indemnity and public liability insurance suited to this work?
- Can we see a sample report? It should carry every item listed in Schedule 1 of LOLER.
- How quickly will we receive reports, and how will you tell us about a dangerous defect?
- Is any part of your work accredited by a third party, for example to ISO/IEC 17020 for inspection bodies?
About the job
- Which items need a test as well as an examination, and is that in the price?
- Will each item be tagged, and will the tag match the report?
- Can you draw up a written scheme of examination if we need one?
What the competent person must do
The law gives the competent person duties of their own under regulation 10. They must:
- make a report to the employer as soon as practicable, with the information in Schedule 1;
- tell the employer at once about any defect that is or could become a danger;
- where there is an existing or imminent risk of serious personal injury, send a copy of the report to the relevant enforcing authority (HSE or the local authority) as soon as practicable.
That last duty applies even if the examiner is your own employee. It is one reason impartiality matters: the examiner must be free to report.
Where duty holders go wrong
Using the operator’s daily check as the examination
Pre-use checks by operators are good practice and often required by the maker, but they are not a thorough examination and do not satisfy regulation 9.
Accepting a service sheet as a report
A service sheet records maintenance. Unless it contains the Schedule 1 details and is made by a competent person acting as examiner, it is not a report of thorough examination.
Not checking the scope
An examiner can only report on what they examined. If slings or attachments were not on the list, they were not examined.
The short version
Choose someone who knows your kind of equipment, is independent of its maintenance, and produces proper reports. If you would like us to find one who covers your sites, send us your equipment list.