What are the risks of using a non-accredited Asbestos Inspection Body?
Monday, January 18, 2010 @ 09:01 AM posted by UKAS Accredited IB's Admin
There are various risks associated with using a non accredited asbestos inspection body and these are extensively covered within the Asbestos Inspection Bodies (AIB) Blog. Click here for further information
- Inexperienced staff – competence is built on qualifications, knowledge and experience (P402 alone is not a demonstration of competence)
- Insufficient resource leading to inadequate and incomplete surveys and possibility of missing asbestos products especially those that are not immediately obvious by sight alone
- Unclear reports and inappropriate recommendations for remedial action
- A lack of impartiality
- No comeback (no formal complaints procedure, no higher authority)
- Lack of due diligence/exposure to future claims
- Possible insurance gaps
“HSE strongly recommends that an accredited surveyor is used to carry out complex type 1, 2 and 3 surveys”
I could level the above accusations at more than one UKAS accredited consultancy. Inexperienced staff and insufficient resources are a common issue amongst labs, and impartiality is an interesting question given the number of labs being acquired by stripping companies – like, er, Redhills?
Don’t get me wrong I’d rather use a UKAS consultant than not, but lets not pretend that everything will be instantly right with the world.
In the case of Redhills, they are placed under scrutiny in this matter as a result of their visibility. Redhills proactively advertise and promote the fact that they are part of a group that shares the same name as one of the removal contractors also within the group. They are not owned by a removal contractor nor is there any affect to the integrity and impartiality of the business by virtue of this group link. UKAS audits are undertaken at Redhills over a 5 day period and Independence, Impartiality and Integrity are key areas that not only do UKAS wish to audit and confirm but also that Redhills as a business is procative in promoting and maintaining to ensure there is no conflict or can be any question of this
I’ve no doubt that Redhills are completely above board, and as you say, their position within the group is not a secret. I was just pointing out that you could easily title this piece ‘What are the risks of using an Accredited inspection body?’ and every one of your points could apply.
It depends on what you want this blog to achieve – a platform for puff pieces about the industry or a place for education of clients and discussion within the asbestos consultancy world. The second option would be very useful in my opinion.
Clients should take the above advice on board, take UKAS accreditation as a minimum and then take their own steps to ensure they are using a reputable organisation, such as those linked from this site. Pulling the wool over UKAS’ eyes for the duration of a Surveillance visit has been a speciality of many companies over the years….
Chris,
You clearly have a lot of knowledge of the industry and the aim of the blog is to try and spread the type of knowledge you have, to a wider audience. Regrettably since the introduction of Duty to Manage, many organisations have jumped on the asbestos bandwagon with little or no asbestos knowledge. Many clients have been misled into spending when not necessary and the concept of managing asbestos based upon material risk has disappeared.
The aim of the blog is to ensure that the correct information is being delivered to those using the services of asbestos organisations and to assist UKAS in marketing accredited Inspection Bodies. Regrettably HSE have still not made this a mandatory requirement and as a result, it is impossible to police those who undertake asbestos surveys.
To me this is crazy when the Government insists that those undertaking energy audits need to be registered. This was summed up for me a few days ago, after we received a phone call from an ‘asbestos consultant’ who advertised as an asbestos specialist yet knew nothing about air monitoring, a little more about asbestos surveying, and was asking what he should tell his client! This isn’t what the industry needs.
I quite agree. The number of organisations advertising their services for asbestos surveying without any form of accreditation is worrying – as I’ve said accreditation is no guarantee of competence, but it sure beats those companies who are promoting their services on the back of one member of staff with a P402.
The HSE has been responsible for starting several asbestos ‘goldrushes’ over the years, when new legislation and guidance prompts every man and his dog to jump on the bandwagon and promote themselves as experts and HSG264 is no exception – one of the early results for a Google search on ‘HSG264′ leads to a so called consultant advising duty holders that they need to re-survey their buildings as a result of this new ‘legislation’. Oh really?
I guess had UKAS remained ‘NAMAS’ and part of the government, then HSE could have insisted on their use, but as they can’t be seen to endorse a private organisation who effectively operate a closed shop…..
Oh well, we can only fight our corner and hope we win in the end. Unfortunately people will continue to be exposed to asbestos as a result of cowboy surveys.