OT: Kids driving legalities?

But of course. Ear Defenders for going in noisy Discos

Absolutely. Any such "bans" (such as the banning of bonfires on Nov 5 and their replacement with "safe" alternatives, which did happen in one place AFAIK) are almost always instigated by insurance companies who are fearful of being sued by litigious attendees. Sadly, they are probably right to do so, from a commercial viewpoint, as the courts seem to side too often with people whose own common sense has not protected them from harm, or who cannot accept that some things are just accidents that happen. But it's absolutely nothing to do with the HSE or with health and safety legislation.

Thing is I've seen a fair few times that statistics gathered in the last 5 years or so has not shown any increase in compensation cases being bought. The real issue here is that there's so much bullshit flying around that it's hard to believe what's what, but personally I tend to disbelieve the really cynical stuff like the everyone's suing each other rubbish.

Er - if there wasn't an accident, why would anyone be prosecuted?

Well, nobody is prosecuted, if that's what you mean. But again, why would they? I can't see your point.

True - and it's usually the employer at the end of the day.

What system is that? I am not aware of any system of accreditation or authorisation - the HSWA only demands that those doing risk assessments etc is a "competent person".

Exactly the reverse, in my experience. Blame tends to flow upwards - the worker rarely gets the blame for anything. Blatant disregarding of agreed safe systems of work, for example, may reduce a compensation award, but the employer will usually still be ultimately liable.

I can't agree with this. HSE are usually very hot on employers who think that minimal training and a sign-off sheet can substitute for a proper system of safety management. Employees can claim what they like, but the HSWA is very specific about safety being ultimately the employer's responsibility.

Then the advice was faulty - negligently so. I hope the firm didn't pay too much for it.

To return to your original point with which I disagreed, the *legislation* is all about safety. The courts are all about blame. I notice you haven't answered my question.

Without wanting to get into a willy-waving contest, anyone can write policy. Whether it's any good is another matter.

And yet you can be presecuted for installing electrical equipment in your home if you're either not qualified or don't have the appropriate permission.

The legislation doesn't impose safety, it imposes a system of punishments in the event of an accident.

You mean that the diffeences between a 'competant person' and an 'authorised person' haven't arrisen in your environment yet?

Oh what joys you have yet to experience...

Nothing, they were lucky.

But nothing happens until there's an accident, and then it's up to the courts...

There's a hole in my bucket...

Sure. I was only thinking that it is the *perception* of being liable to action that tends to drive inscos to be over-cautious.

And the relevance of this to the discussion is?

Describe this "system of punishment". It's new one on me.

Again, what is this "system of accreditation and authorisation" you mention? Give us some details so we can see what you are talking about.

Nice snippage of my request for an answer to my original question. "In what way - and feel free to be very, very precise - is H&S legislation (1) not about health and safety and (2) about apportioning blame? Direct quotations from HSWA 1974 and Management Regs of 1999 will get you extra marks. Quotations from the Dail Mail or Sun on "Yet More Health And Safety Madness" will not." Answer please.

It's called 'the courts'.

In the area of the electrical industry where I was working there is a difference between people allowed to do work and people allowed to 'sign off' jobs.

To be honest, I can't be bothered.

I don't do this stuff for money any more and I've left behind the days when I did it for people doing a hobby that involved explosives (which, as I'm sure you know, is one of the few areas where H&S legislation applies even though nobody is actually working)

Meaningless until you arrive in court.

In message , Tim Jones writes

The one were sods law lurks and hindsight dominates.

In message , Ian Rawlings writes

But therein lies the problem. "Sense" will ultimately be defined in a court room full of lawyers arguing on interpretation and technical legal points and all with a good helping of hindsight.

Which is most emphatically NOT the same thing as H&S legislation - which was my original point. Thank you.

Nothing whatsoever to do with shovelling blame around. As you correctly say above, that is a matter for the courts.

Or you can't answer it?

Yes, I was aware of that, but it's a bit of a specialised case in this discussion, which started with driving a RR round a field.

We're going nowhere here. Let's stop.

Only in marginal cases, and only then when something nasty happens.

I still think its okay to let your kid drive a motor vehicle around on private land with the owners permission. that's how I learned to drive, that's how my wife learned to drive, and that's how my son learned to drive.

Mike

No problem. The only legal issue is the common-law duty of care. As long as the landowner isn't negligent (like having an unfenced 200ft drop that he hasn't warned you about) it's up to what you decide between you.

On or around Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:18:28 -0000, "William Black" enlightened us thusly:

That's nowt to do with the HSE though. That's at least in part down to lobbying by the electricians, I reckon; like CORGI and the gas lot.

On or around Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:55:44 -0000, "Rich B" enlightened us thusly:

...lack of...

"Austin Shackles" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

It has a lot more to do with people going down to B&Q and fitting a new consumer unit or a cooker box and promptly blowing either themselves or their family sky high.

It isn't the electricians, the domestic installations lot aren't that and you don't need 'Part P' for industrial or commercial installations.

If you're actually a reasonably well trained electrician who has passed '16th edition' then the 'Part P' course is trivial to pass.