These draft regs and guidance are not easy to follow..... I thought they were supposed to be more simple and straight forward!

I may be interpreting this incorrectly..... A health and safety file is only required where there is more than one contractor. (Paragraph 45 & 114).
Surely the client requires the information irrespective of the number of contractors?

Also, a Principal Designer must be appointed where there is more than one contractor (reg 5. 1). What if there is only one contractor but two or more designers. Am I missing where one needs to assume the PD role?

In theory, a significant project with one designer (a large design practice) and one large contractor (employing multiple trades) wouldn't need to have a PD appointed, therefore no need to produce a hsf by my way of thinking.

Appendix 4 chapter 16...... The contractor has no specific duties placed on them in relation to the health and safety file.

I would appreciate if anyone can point out where / if I am misinterpreting these points.

Thank you.

As I have said on another thread there are very few contractors who do not subcontract at least part of their work. The days of a contractor with a total multi skilled workforce capable of doing every trade ever required in construction has long gone, if it ever existed. So very few project, and then only small single task type, will be outside of the scope of part of the regulations.

With regard to boblewis's comment we had a situation recently that would create a slight anomaly if the new regs were to be applied. We had two rooms that were being refurbished with numerous contractors involved therefore a H&S File would have been required - I have no problem with that. However we also had a whole building that was refurbished using a single contractor who employed all the labour, using no subbies etc. That job under the new regs would not have required a H&S File, which strikes me as being a bit odd. It seems in our senario the small job required more paperwork etc than the larger one and the larger one was by some margin the more significant of the two(?).

I am regularly involved with demolition projects which have one contractor and a structural engineer. This falls under the scope of 'construction work' as defined in the regs. The contractor does everything from asbestos survey through to tidying the site. By virtue of the new regs, there won't need to be an hsf to let the client know about utility cut off points, contamination, etc.
The regs apply to all construction work irrespective of project size and seem to be trying to be all things to all men (and women) without making the requirements clear. There seems to be a lot of reading between the lines required, which is open to interpretation and will only be defined in a court of law. Happy days!

The revised Regs have surely missed the point?
The "more than one contractor" requirement should be concerned with and focus on matters of overlap, inappropriate sequencing and miscommunication. I personally believe that was the intent of the parent Directive.

Enabling works shouldn't be major concern in that respect?

The CDM 2015 Regs appear confusing, that may be because of the unfamiliarity of the regs or it might be because they are poorly written, or both. To answer the question - a PD will only be appointed when there is more than one contractor (which as discussed is most of the time) the Client must ensure the PD prepares a H&S File pursuant to Reg 4. - (5)(b).

The above is a bit of a conflict given the Client is the one who would want the H&S File. As the regulations read, if the PD does not provide the H&S File, then the Client is in breach of the regulations as well as the PD!

Another can of worms...

'Appointment of the principal designer and the principal contractor' Regulation 5.—(1) Where there is more than one contractor, or if it is reasonably foreseeable that more than one contractor will be working on a project at any time, the client must appoint in writing—
(a) a designer with control over the pre-construction phase as principal designer;

So, assuming there is only one contractor working on the project, then there is no PD. If there is no PD, then no H&S File because the duty to provide one falls on the PD pursuant to 12.-(5). Of course, it could be argued that if the Client fails to appoint a PD, then the duties of a PD fall to the Client 5.-(3) and specifically 11 & 12.

Hmm, with respect, that appears to be stating the obvious. If the intent is to have more than one contractor (even if there is only one at present) then the caveat in Reg 5.-(1) must apply: '...or if it is reasonably foreseeable that more than one contractor will be working on a project at any time...'

Ok I'm with you now. Apologies but I never considered my previous comments could be misleading.

Phew! These regulations are giving me a headache and I still have yet to finish a presentation on them and article for you know who. Crack on.

Just to add into the mix, lets not forget that it says - if the PD has finished their works before the end of the job then it falls to the PC to complete the H&S file.