The short version
PUWER is the wide net: work equipment must be suitable, maintained, inspected where required, and used safely by people who are competent for the task.
LOLER is the extra layer for lifting: equipment (and many accessories) used to lift or lower loads has additional duties — including thorough examination at set intervals, planning of lifting operations, and written examination reports.
If kit is work equipment and used for lifting, you typically need to satisfy both — not pick one.
Side-by-side
| PUWER | LOLER | |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Most work equipment used at work | Lifting equipment and lifting operations |
| Typical examples | Machine tools, conveyors, power presses, many plant items | Cranes, hoists, forklifts (as lifting), MEWPs, lifting accessories |
| Core idea | Safe provision and use of equipment | Safe lifting + statutory thorough examination |
| Evidence flavour | Assessment / inspection records, maintenance, training | Examination reports, examination schemes, lift planning |
When only PUWER is in play
Equipment that is clearly work equipment but is not used for lifting/lowering loads sits under PUWER’s general duties. Your review still needs to be competent and the record still needs to show what was checked and what follows — but you are not inventing a LOLER thorough examination where LOLER does not apply.
When LOLER adds duties
Where equipment is used for lifting operations, LOLER brings sharper expectations around thorough examination by a competent person, frequency (often driven by how the equipment is used), and the written report of that examination. PUWER does not disappear — suitability, maintenance, and safe use still matter.
Why the mix-up causes bad processes
- Wrong label on the work
Calling every machine check a “LOLER” — or every lift exam a “PUWER” — confuses clients, QA, and your own scheduling.
- Missing trail for one regime
A solid PUWER-style walkaround does not automatically satisfy a LOLER thorough examination report — and vice versa.
- Inconsistent mapping in reports
Findings written against the wrong duty set make action lists and audits harder than they need to be.
Practical checklist before you leave site
- Is this work equipment under PUWER? (Usually yes if used at work.)
- Is it used for lifting/lowering loads (or an accessory for that)?
- If yes to both — plan evidence for both duty sets.
- Name the regime on the finding so the report does not blur them.
- Capture photo + action while you are still with the asset.
How this connects to Ardie
Clear regime labelling is part of consistent regulation mapping. Ardie is built to reduce the grind of capture, keep findings aligned to the right duties, and produce reports and action lists from the review — whether you run turnkey SaaS or integrate into systems you already use. Better labelling in the report means less rewrite later and fewer awkward questions in audit.
This article is practical guidance, not legal advice. Confirm duties against current HSE guidance and your competent-person / examination arrangements. Edge cases (e.g. equipment that moves people but is not “lifting” in LOLER terms) need careful reading of the guidance — do not force a label.