The practical answer
Inspection arrangements should be proportionate to the equipment, how it is used and the risks that could develop. A useful starting point is to separate routine maintenance, operator checks and formal inspection: each can contribute evidence, but they do not automatically replace one another.
For PUWER, there is no universal rule that every machine requires an annual external inspection. The dutyholder should consider installation, deterioration, exceptional circumstances and whether inspection is necessary to ensure health and safety conditions are maintained.
What good evidence looks like
Useful records identify the asset, inspection scope, date, relevant conditions, findings and actions. Photographs can strengthen the record, particularly when they show the condition observed and the location of a deficiency.
Competence, inspection frequency and scope should follow the equipment and risk—not a convenient slogan.
Questions to ask
- Could deterioration, damage or modification create a safety risk?
- Does the current inspection regime reflect the equipment’s use and environment?
- Are findings prioritised and tracked through to close-out?
- Can the organisation demonstrate what was checked, by whom and when?
Authoritative sources
For regulatory interpretation and current guidance, consult the relevant legislation and the Health and Safety Executive’s work-equipment guidance. Specialist applications may require additional sources.