Hello Rojo, in your post"custom" dictated that they did not routinely test Class II equipment, this is not necessarily incorrect, if you follow the general guidance on electrical testing from the IEE, I can see how such a decision has been arrived at using a logical process.
Regards
Sean
Extract from The IEE Code of Practice (3rd Edition)
In-service Inspection and Testing of Electrical Equipment
7.1 Inspection
In-service inspection and testing of equipment are essential to ensure to ensure safety, and a regime of time and risk assessment based inspections and tests should be implemented.
In-service inspections can be carried out by the user of the equipment, and in some circumstances this may be all that is necessary.
An example of circumstances where user inspections may be the only inspection required is in a low risk environment where Class II equipment is used.
Inspection should always precede testing.
A properly carried out inspection can identify many faults that will not necessarily be apparent from electrical tests, such as a cracked case, a loose connection, a damaged flex and evidence of overheating.
7.2 Categories of inspection and testing
Three categories of in-service inspection and testing are referred to in this Code of Practice.
User checks: faults are to be reported and logged and faulty equipment should be removed from service. No record is required if no fault is found.
Formal visual inspections: inspections without tests, the results of which, satisfactory or unsatisfactory are recorded.
Combined inspections and tests: the results of which are recorded.
7.3 Frequency of inspection and testing
The relevant requirement of the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 is that equipment shall be maintained so as to prevent danger. Inspection and testing are means of determining when maintenance i.e. required.
The frequency of inspection and testing will depend upon the likelihood of maintenance being required and the consequence of lack of maintenance. No rigid guidelines can be laid down, but factors influencing the decision include the following.
The environment: equipment installed in a benign environment, such as an office, will suffer less damage than equipment installed in an arduous environment, such as a construction site.
The users: if the users of the equipment report damage as and when it becomes evident, hazards will be avoided. Conversely, if equipment is likely to receive unreported abuse, more frequent inspection and testing are required.
The equipment construction: the safety of a Class I appliance is dependant upon a connection with the earth of the fixed electrical installation. If the flexible cable is damaged the connection with earth can be lost.
The safety of Class II equipment is not dependant upon the integrity of the electrical installation.
If equipment is known to be Class II and is used in a low risk environment, such as an office, recorded testing (but not inspection) may be omitted.
The equipment type: An appliance that is hand-held is more likely to be damaged than a fixed appliance. If such an appliance is also Class I the risk of danger is increased, as safety is dependant upon the continuity of the protective conductor from the plug to the appliance.
The most important check that can be carried out on a piece of equipment is the visual inspection. The visual inspection can identify many defects, particularly in the case of portable appliances or hand held tools where defects in the plug, the cable or casing occur.
If the user cannot routinely disconnect the equipment to facilitate a user inspection, this should be taken into account when determining the frequency of inspection.
7.4 Review of frequency of inspection and testing
The intervals between checks, formal inspections and tests should be kept under review, particularly until patterns of failure, or damage, if any, are determined.
Particularly close attention should be paid to initial checks, formal inspections and tests to see if there is a need to reduce the intervals or change the equipment or its use.
