Posted By Robert K Lewis CLarke After all his involvement with the acop I am pleased to know that Andrew understands perfectly what has been written including the very explicit para of the acop. Those who wish to get the client to do it can do so if they wish but I will continue with my understanding of the acop. George I am surprised by your Company Secretary as I have a practicing lawyer stating the opposite. Steve It is not a question of fees but of proper interpretation. Signing on behalf of the client is actually more cost effective and thus does not increase fees. We make sure on appointment that he understands his duties and do so in writing as has always been done. Eddie In view of the comments from my own HSE office I have to accept your assertions as unproven at this time. Peter I think your last statement sums it up well. Bob

Posted By David G C If the CDM C competently performs his duties and is confident that his client has been advised and educated well and he is confident that his client fully understands his duties what would the issue be for signing on behalf of his client. IMO It would be for the CDM C to demonstrate the steps that he has taken what would be reasonably expected for a CDM- C to take in order to advise his client - should it all go terribly wrong in this respect. However! New F10 section 13 (unlucky for some” you might say)states…… I (In my book means client or an employee of the clients organisation) am aware of my duties under the Construction Design and Management Regulations 2007 Signed by or on behalf of the organisation……………..or as Regulation 21 (3) states....if sent by electronic means, shall otherwise show that he has approved it. In a meeting today we had a lenghty debate on who would sign the F10 which involved 3 clients for same project. David

Posted By JEB And the outcome of the lengthy discussion with 3 clients was ??????

Posted By DJ I have noted the many threads on this subject, but please forgive me if I have lost the plot and I am simply saying that which has already been stated. Although I am a lawyer, this is my "personal" legal opinon (which is not necessarily that of my firm or anybody else for that matter). You should also note that my views are given not as legal advice and you are asked to seek independent advice (legal or otherwise) before acting on anything said by me. Regulation 23(1) requires that from tomorrow (6 April) the client signs the F10. If he/she is an individual then that is simple enough, he/she signs the F10. As a body corporate cannot sign, a director, company secretary or similar officer can sign for and on behalf of the company. Any other person can also sign for and on behalf of the company provided they have actual or ostensible (highly unlikely if you are not one of the people above) authority to do so. The Courts will not look into whether or not the individual had authority, they will assume the signature was FAOB. It will then be for the company to try and recover its losses from the individual (e.g. CDM-C) who purported to have the authority to sign. A note of caution for all CDM-Cs, to make sure you have written authority to sign as you might be sued for the client's losses otherwise. I hope this helps. Regards. DJ

Posted By Robert K Lewis DJ Disagree with you almost totally on the second point - read the acop Bob

Posted By Robert K Lewis Would not be too sure of that after my last conversation with her. It seems that some organisations deny that the manager letting a contract is the client - he represents the client. It does make you wonder what is happening! Bob

Posted By Peter Leese Stephanie Rafferty is a secretary/administrator at the HSE. Yes M'lud, she said she was with the HSE so I blindly followed her instructions to the letter. No, I didn't think to question it, after all the HSE is it, the big one, no doubt in my mind. So you blindly went ahead on the say so of an office administrator. Yes M'lud ?????? Come on guys. get real.

Posted By Robert K Lewis Just for the record also the term "by or on behalf of" appears in other legislation eg Ombudsman Act and is covered in the assiociated guidance - It means something totally different to Andrew East group's interpretation. I rather think the courts are bound to follow the existing precedent. It appears that some organisations have claimed that they are so complex that they do not know who is the client. Is it the chief exec or the service director or the business unit. The client is a legal person, singular or plural and any employee authorised to sign contracts is signing as the client, ie the contract is signed by the client. I rather think that some poor information is being passed out somewhere stating that the individual signing is the client and takes on the full responsibilities personally. Absolute Tommy rot, the HSE should have nailed this firmly but are so weakened nowdays that they blow with the wind. The alternative to the above possibility is that hidden political pressures are being exerted to undermine the legislation before it is properly born, so to speak. If the HSE give in to this then how far can we traust any future actions from them. Either way I will stand with my view and await the inspector calling. Bob

Posted By MAK now that Ive had time to get a nice cup of T, the practical aspect. If for whatever reason we dont get to sit in front of our clients with our paperwork to hand, See Reg 21 (3) the "client" or the person otherwise described as the "client" can provide a declaration by email or by letter providing us the information as set out in sections 10 and 13 of the F10, which we of course will duly attach a copy of to our nice crisp F10's for issue to the relevant HSE. I really really hope that helps. Have a nice day all.

Posted By Crim Lots of interest here, as expected, also lots of differing views. I'm no expert but the regs require the Client (and only the Client), to sign a declaration therefore no other individual should even think about signing. If the Clients' organisation are unable to agree who should sign the declaration the project will go unnotified and will not start. The CDM-C has a duty to notify the project but cannot do that if the Client has not signed. Let's not make it easy for the Client to cop out!

Posted By Robert K Lewis Crim Just one last thing to say, perhaps, if the legislators intended only the client to sign then Reg 21 and appendix 1 would have stated "signed by the client". It does not state this and therefore must mean something different. "By or on behalf of" has a widely recognised meaning in much other legislation and no where does it match the view that it is only the legal person who can do the action. The HSE have capitulated to a minority pressure group who are trying desperately to undermine the real value of the regulations. I am content with my processes and have clear legal advice that I can demonstrate the client approval and knowledge of the F10 and their duties. I feel that any challenge by the HSE in court will result in another waste to the public purse. The alternative view to mine would state that the HSE and the drafting committee effectively did not have the competencies to draw up this legislation and thus drafted it in a manner which did not reflect what they actually wished to say. In this case obviously we would have to then question the ability of the HSE to interpret legislation and I am sure we do not wish to do that. The whole thrust here is to suggest that "we need to nail recalcitrant clients to the floor". Surely if they have taken the trouble to employ a competent organisation as coordinator then the duties placed on the coordinator will ensure that they do make the client fully aware of their duties and assist them in the fulfillment of those duties. Coordinators in such situations can now surely, with client recorded authority, sign any F10 on behalf of the client. I am, of course, missing out much of the detailed records etc in this outline. I also know of trainers/speakers on the new regulations who are stating that the person who signs the contract/F10 as the client is individually "the client". This is being used to create an argument that the term "on behalf of" means also a client employee. Total nonsense, contract law as I have said is well established. If I am employed by the client, the legal person, and am properly designated and authorised to enter into contracts than I am acting as the client. The contract clearly states that X, as client, is entering into a contract for the provision of services etc to be provided by Y. The precise signatory is irrelevant providing the client has authorised that person to act in that role in the process. We are confusing the fact that F10 is by or on behalf of the client in a legal framework. Whereas internal procedures in an organisation designate who may sign as the organisation in contract letting etc., unfortunately this is often termed as signing on behalf of the organisation, but strictly it is on behalf of the CEO etc.- It is the delegated authority of the individual person at the top of the organisation to sign on her/his behalf, but this is, in the strict legal sense, not the client as the legal entity.. I would ask again that we stop trying to split hairs on a matter that is actually secondary to all that we need to do. Think of such as: a) The impact on clients for non-notifiable work b) The real impacts of regulation 7 - Principles of Prevention, c) How can we obtain co-ordination and co-operation d) The content of the pre construction information e) Effective management of welfare facilities from day 1 I could go on but it will still, I suspect fall on the deaf ears of all those who think that the F10 is the biggest issue around the new regulations. let us have some clarity of thinking and concentrate on the safety of the operatives on site and how it will be best achieved. Bob

Posted By Robert K Lewis ddraigice Unfortunately it is Andrew East and his group leading the capitulation. This is what is so infuriating. Bob

Posted By holyterror72 Agreed.

Posted By Peter Leese Agreed Bob. I can't get my head round why some people join a forum like this just to make one single derogatary comment!

Posted By Robert K Lewis Martyn Makes no difference as the client is a legal entity defined in contract law. Then even the sole trader is actually signing as the client not himself, similarly with partnerships. The HSE have not defined client thus we have to resort to the common definitions held elsewhere in law. This whole question arose because the HSE and to an extent other parties were trying to make a recognised legal phrase mean something other than it means elsewhere in law and other official documents. As a legal entity a client organisation operates through its officers and managers who are authorised to act in particular ways. My concern out of all this is that it appears to expose the reduced level of competencies for drafting and interpreting legislation available to the HSE. Is this going to affect its long term reputation for infallibility - probably so. Bob