Four hundred kettles, again
An office client, three floors, a few hundred items. Last year's results are in a spreadsheet exported from the tester, with asset numbers that don't quite match the labels on the plugs because somebody relabelled a floor. This year's tester starts from scratch, re-enters descriptions, and can't tell whether the missing fan heater was thrown away or is hiding under a desk.
The report goes out with a new list that doesn't line up with the old one, and the client's facilities manager asks why the numbers changed.
Why the register doesn't carry over
Testers store results, but the download is a file that gets emailed and saved somewhere. When the next visit comes round, it's a different tester, a different device, or the same device wiped. The asset list, which is the valuable part, isn't held anywhere the team can pick it up and continue from.
Retest frequencies also vary by item type and environment, set by the client and your own guidance. Without a proper register, everyone gets the same interval, or the interval is whatever was written on the label.
| Register problem | What it causes |
|---|---|
| No carry-over from last visit | Items re-entered, numbering drifts |
| Missing items not noticed | Client can't account for equipment |
| One interval for everything | Some items tested too often, some too late |
| Failed items not followed up | No record of repair or disposal |
| Report in a new format each year | Hard for the client to compare |
Multi-site clients multiply the problem. A client with offices in several towns may have had different testers at each, each producing its own report format. Pulling those into a single view for the client's facilities team is something nobody has time to do by hand, so it is not done.
What rebuilding costs
Testing time goes on typing descriptions. Clients lose confidence when their register changes shape every year. Failed items without a clear follow-up record sit in a grey area. And the next visit isn't booked, so you rely on the client remembering, which is how the work drifts to another firm.
Pricing suffers as well. If you don't know how many items a site really has, you quote from last year's total and hope. A register that is accurate lets you price the next visit properly and explain any change in cost.
The register we build
- Client asset register: one live list per client site, with asset number, description, location, item class and retest interval.
- On-site working list: the tester opens the site on a phone or tablet and works through the list by floor or room, ticking items tested. Results come from the tester's export where it supports one.
- Differences: items not found, new items and relabelled items are flagged as the tester goes, so the client gets an explanation rather than a changed total.
- Failures: failed items get a record of what happened next, whether repaired, replaced or removed, confirmed with the client.
- Report: a consistent report for the client, same layout each year, with a comparison against the last visit.
- Next visit plan: due dates by item are rolled up into a next visit, offered to the client ahead of time.
Test intervals and pass criteria are yours and the client's to set. The register just holds them.
Visits that pick up where the last one ended
Testers spend their time testing. Clients see a register that makes sense year to year. Failed items have a clear trail. And the next visit is on the calendar before the current one is invoiced.
Multi-site clients get a single view across their premises, so a facilities manager can see which offices are due next and which have outstanding failures, without asking you for a spreadsheet.
Is this your PAT testing work?
- Asset lists are rebuilt at each visit.
- Numbers on labels don't match the previous report.
- Clients ask where missing items went.
- Every item gets the same retest interval.
- Repeat visits depend on the client remembering to ask.