HEALTHCARE LIFTS
Key priorities to ensure safe and reliable lift operation
John Newbold, director of lift consultancy business, SVM Associates, who has worked in the lift business for almost 40 years, outlines some of the challenges faced, and lessons learnt, from assisting both Estates and Capital Project Departments manage their lifts.
A central aspect of the Authorising Engineer Lifts AE (L) role is an annual audit. Our audits consider a broad range of advice and standards relating to lifts. These include healthcare-specific guidelines such as those detailed in HTM 08-02: Design and maintenance of lifts in the health sector, and the Premises Assurance Model, lift-related standards including BS EN 13015, BS 7255, BS 9999, and BS EN 81-80, and statutory requirements PUWER, MHSWR, and LOLER.
How do we manage compliance? Of these we find LOLER compliance to require the most active management. With passenger-carrying lifts requiring six-monthly Thorough Examinations, there is frequent opportunity for a lapse in process to expose the Trust to statutory risk. We have seen lifts in service without a current Certificate of Thorough Examination discovered only through the occurrence of an accident. This need not be a serious accident, but a trip, fall, or collision with a door that at best will strengthen the effectiveness of any commercial claim, and at worst lead to legal action against the Trust. This situation can occur if the process is simply relying on the Competent Person under LOLER (often an insurance company) to schedule and complete their regular inspections. Lifts can be omitted from a regular LOLER inspection if they are isolated, awaiting repair, and then returned to service by the lift contractor inadvertently without a Certificate of Thorough Examination. We have seen good processes to manage this – including a traffic light compliance board for each lift mounted in the Estates office, and a lock-off, tag-off process that requires current certification on lift reinstatement. Changes to SAFed guidance (referenced by LOLER inspectors) have led to many
Above: John Newbold, director of lift consultancy business, SVM Associates, has worked in the lift business for almost 40 years. Left: Changes to SAFed guidance (referenced by LOLER inspectors) have led to many more recommendations for Supplementary Tests on safety equipment.
more recommendations for Supplementary Tests on safety equipment. If these are not heeded and carried out ahead of the next inspection, the Competent Person will not examine the lift – effectively removing it from service. Active review of reports and raising the requisite actions need to be scheduled activities.
HTM 08-02-compliant lift maintenance – is it possible? The role of Competent Person as defined in HTM 08-02 is a lift service contractor. Some good advice as to the requirements of a lift maintenance contract is contained in HTM 08-02, but this is almost never reflected in lift contractors’ standard terms. They are usually lacking in detail as to specific maintenance activities, and the inclusions ill defined. Some also have an automatic roll-over provision, meaning the Trust can inadvertently enter into a new contract term because it did not actively cancel the contract in the defined period. Performance-guaranteed maintenance
contracts (PGMC), which have a commercial link to Service Level Agreements, or fully comprehensive contracts, are recommended by HTM 08-02. The rationale behind this is to place the cost risk of equipment failure with the party most able to manage it, i.e. the lift contractor. While the day-to-day contract management is easier, without the need for numerous quotes and orders, the temptation for the lift contractor not to repair faulty or poor-performing equipment at its cost needs to be managed to improve the performance and reliability of the lifts. Where a more basic contract coverage is in place, the move up to a comprehensive contract or PGMC can mean a significant increase in contract cost, especially with a mixed or ageing lift fleet. Overall cost may not be higher when the cost of ad-hoc lift repairs is also factored in. A comprehensive position is available in the form of a ‘threshold’ contract, whereby the Trust accepts liability for repairs above a certain value.
May 2023 Health Estate Journal 51
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
