Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Sailor JT  
#1 Posted : 27 January 2014 10:26:48(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Sailor JT

Have come across a situation where a Risk Assessment has been sent of with one persons name on it as if it has been completed by them and they have had no input into it at all, they did not sign it but it looks as though it was accepted as their work, would welcome your thoughts on this
Graham Bullough  
#2 Posted : 27 January 2014 11:36:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Graham Bullough

Sailor Even if the risk assessment is good in all other respects, the act of putting someone's name on it as the author without their knowledge/consent is fraudulent.
Canopener  
#3 Posted : 27 January 2014 11:44:40(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

This is potentially an offence - false instrument - maybe It may also be a common occurrence!
Steve W1  
#4 Posted : 27 January 2014 12:56:10(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Steve W1

IOSH Code Of Conduct Part 2 -1.1 1.Integrity - Members are required to: "Knowingly misleading anybody for financial or other gain that could not have been made honestly is most likely to be unacceptable" "Example include entering misleading details on policies, procedures, risk assessments or similar documentation or records"
Frank Hallett  
#5 Posted : 27 January 2014 13:07:47(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Frank Hallett

Hi JT My advice - "run for cover now"! Are you "employed" or an external in the position of "consultant"? Whilst the RA in question is still currently within the system as it were; it could very easily escape the confines of your system and become the equivalent of a small land-mine for everyone who knew, suspected, or should have known that it was probably fraudulent. Let's hope that this isn't one of those threads where we are drip-fed additional info that would make the position clearer from the beginning and that this can be resolved by the application of a firm managerial direction to those concerned - starting with a thorough review of all other RAs from the same source. Frank Hallett
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.