Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By a grá
I was wondering if anybody could help a little
I have been told by a few people lately that they would never act as the CDMC because of the large amount of liability that comes with the job.
My question is what liability? If there was an accident onsite and it is revealed that the CDMC is not doing as he is supposed to be doing would he be liable? Whats the worst that could happen to a company acting as PC & CDMC but not really doing much in the CDMC role? Does anyone have a good argument or presentation full of facts, regs, cases to persuade a company to surrender the role and employ a specialist?
If anyone can give me some good info on this I would be very greatful
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
The underlying assumption in your question is that the CDM-C is an individual person - The role is primarily not so intended except very small works where an individual may have all the skills - but this is the exception not the rule.
On this basis if the PC is appointed as co-ordinator the use of an employee within the role does not place responsibility legally on the employee - It continues with the company and it is itself open to prosecution or other regulatory action in the event of a breach of the regulations.
A similar parallel point has been raised with respect to who is the client when considering the F10 signature. Many came to believe for some reason that the individual signatory on the contract was the client and not the organisation. The whole "by or on behalf of" argument stemmed from this mistaken idea.
The legislation talks in terms of person as a legal entity not specifically as an individual person, the confusion arises from the lack of recognition of this point.
Please rethink what you are suggesting in your posting as this may lay your company open to action. You need to address the problem with your line manager. My general view is that this is a time when external consultants can often get a stronger message across to directors than internal managers, certainly that has been my experience with a number of organisations where I have been recently.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ddraigice
Irrespective of whether there's been an accident, a company who is acting as a PC and CDMC should ensure they are competent to do the job and meet the criteria laid down in the ACoP.
Although HSE are not taking a hard line enforcement approach in the early days, they could prosecute or issue notices just because they are not complying with this. I still see clients who think they can act as PC and CDMC unfortunately, with no experience of either.
The CDMC's job is to ensure the client is aware of his duties to ensure competence of all along the CDM chain, ensure there's enough time for planning, ensure the plan is in place before work starts and that welfare is on site, to name but a few. If some of this is not in place then the client is breaching the regs - unless this hasnt been passed on to him by the CDMC in which case the CDMC is liable. Enforcement could be taken for missing out any of the above duties.
As for accidents, if it can be proven to have occurred because of an act or ommission on the part of the client or cdmc - such as lack of competence of the PC or if there were no competence checks done by the clinet or CDMC on the clients behalf then both could be liable.
The client could also be making design decisions which would mean they are then acting as a designer - which hopefully a competent CDMC would be able to pick up and advise accordingly.
This is very simplistic and there may be other scanarios of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Daniel
I looked into this when the Regs first came out because we needed to consider work opportunities for our consultancy.
As far as I can see, the CDMC role is to pass bits of information from one party to another, notify the HSE, complete a Safety file using information passed to him, and to check on safety management arrangements on behalf of the client, although in contradiction the ACOP advises clients they should not take an active role in monitoring work.
The HSE seem to think he'd be some form of safety expert or lynchpin telling everyone how to do things properly but this doesn't stack up with the legally defined role.
Personally I think there are so many caveats and contradictions in the role you'd never pin down any real laibility without evidence of gross incompetence, and even then there's the civil liability exemption.
We chose not to offer services not because of liability but because we couldn't quantify or define the role and the subsequent costs/fees we might charge, apart from the fact that to do the job properly would cost considerably more than being a Planning supervisor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.