AS 2550.10 repeatedly places responsibility for inspecting a mobile elevating work platform on a 'competent person'. It is a phrase that sounds self-explanatory yet quietly does a lot of work, because who inspects a machine — and how independent they are — directly affects whether the resulting record can be trusted. This guide unpacks what competence means for EWP inspections in Australia, where qualified engineers come into it, and why the independence of the assessor is not a technicality but the foundation of a defensible inspection.
What 'competent person' actually means
The standard frames a competent person as someone with the knowledge, training, skills and experience to carry out the specific task safely and correctly. It is a functional definition rather than a single certificate: competence is demonstrated by relevant qualifications and hands-on experience appropriate to the type of machine and the depth of inspection being performed.
That means competence is not one-size-fits-all. A person competent to perform a periodic inspection on a scissor lift is not automatically competent to run a major inspection on a large truck-mounted boom. The task, the machine and the risks involved all shape what competence looks like in a given case.
Matching competence to the inspection tier
Because the AS 2550.10 regime is tiered, the level of competence required rises with the depth of the check. The operator's daily pre-start is carried out by a trained, competent operator. Routine and periodic inspections call for a competent person with the relevant maintenance and inspection expertise. The major inspection sits at the top and typically draws on deeper engineering assessment.
As a rough guide to who does what:
- Pre-start checks — the trained operator, before every use.
- Routine and periodic inspections — a competent person with EWP maintenance and inspection experience.
- Major inspections — a competent person or team drawing on engineering assessment, non-destructive testing and certification.
- Structural or design questions — a suitably qualified engineer, where the assessment goes beyond condition to fitness of the structure itself.
Where engineers fit in
Not every inspection needs a chartered engineer, but the deeper you go, the more engineering judgement matters. A major inspection re-verifies structural integrity, interprets non-destructive testing results and certifies the outcome — work that leans on engineering competence. Where a machine has been modified, damaged or repaired in a way that affects its structure, or where a design question arises, a suitably qualified engineer is the right person to make the call.
This is also the point where AS 1418 — the design and manufacture side of the standards — becomes relevant to an inspection, because judging whether a repaired or modified structure is still fit for purpose means understanding how it was engineered in the first place. Our companion guide to AS 1418 explains that design-and-manufacture side in more detail.
Why independence matters
Competence answers whether the assessor can do the job; independence answers whether you can trust the answer. The credibility of an inspection rests on the assessor being free of any commercial pressure to pass a machine that should not pass. When the party inspecting a machine also stands to gain from it staying in service, the record loses its value as evidence.
Keeping inspection findings separate from any incentive to reach a particular outcome is what makes an inspection genuinely defensible — to an auditor, to a regulator, or to yourself when deciding whether a machine is safe. This is why an independent, evidence-based assessment is worth more than a convenient one, particularly for major inspections where the stakes and the cost of the finding are highest.
What owners should verify
EWP Australia works Australia-wide as a mobile field service, bringing competent inspection to the machine wherever it is. To discuss whether a given inspection suits your equipment, call 0416 689 689, or email info@ewpaustralia.com.au.
Before entrusting a machine to an inspector, an owner should be satisfied that:
- The person or provider has the knowledge, training and experience appropriate to the specific machine and the depth of inspection.
- The competence extends to that machine type — a boom, scissor, spider or truck-mounted unit each carry different demands.
- For major inspections, the necessary engineering assessment, non-destructive testing and certification capability are in place.
- The assessment is independent and evidence-based, with findings recorded honestly into the logbook rather than shaped by a desired result.
Can an owner inspect their own machine?
A frequent question is whether the person who owns or operates a machine can also inspect it. The short answer is that competence, not ownership, is what the standard turns on — but there are important limits and cautions. An operator is expected to carry out the daily pre-start, which is a competence appropriate to that tier. For routine and periodic inspections, an in-house maintainer who genuinely holds the relevant knowledge, training and experience may be a competent person for those checks.
The deeper you go, the harder it becomes to keep both competence and independence in-house. A major inspection demands engineering assessment, non-destructive testing capability and certification that few owners hold internally, and even where the skills exist, the independence of the finding can be compromised when the inspector answers to the same commercial pressures that want the machine kept working. For most owners, the sensible line is to handle pre-starts and routine care in-house and bring in an independent competent provider for periodic and major inspections.
The value of a documented, independent finding
Whoever performs an inspection, its output is only as useful as the record it leaves behind. A competent, independent assessment recorded honestly into the logbook is what turns a moment of inspection into lasting evidence of compliance. That record is what an auditor reads, what a buyer relies on at resale, and what protects the owner if a machine's condition is ever questioned.
This is the practical reason to care who inspects your machine. The right assessor does not just look at the machine competently; they leave you with a defensible record that stands up long after the inspection is done. A rushed or conflicted inspection may produce a tick in a box, but not the evidence you actually need.
This guide is general information prepared by EWP Australia and is grounded in publicly available Australian Standards and Safe Work Australia material. It is not a substitute for the current published edition of the relevant standard or for site-specific engineering advice. Always work from the current standard and consult a competent person for your specific equipment and application.