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
score  
#1 Posted : 08 November 2019 07:55:02(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
score

I have just completed a CHAS application for one of my clients and was shocked to see that once they applied and sent in their application if further information was required they had a time limit of 10 days to resend the application?

They paid in full at the beginning of the process and could of potentially have lost that money if they went on holiday or were off work sick etc.. i think that is scandalous! 

Ian Bell2  
#2 Posted : 08 November 2019 08:18:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ian Bell2

CHAS is just another bureaucratic money making scheme that does little to improve safety. Yet the construction industry still pay into it.

I guess the scheme has made a few people rich.

RayRapp  
#3 Posted : 08 November 2019 08:57:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

In order to win contracts and appease clients contractors have little option but to join these so-called safety schemes - it's a joke!

thanks 2 users thanked RayRapp for this useful post.
SJP on 15/11/2019(UTC), webstar on 02/12/2019(UTC)
achrn  
#4 Posted : 08 November 2019 11:32:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
achrn

I wouldn't deem that scandalous.

I'd consider it pretty dozy to submit an application to purchase a service without reading the T&Cs for that service, though.

score  
#5 Posted : 08 November 2019 11:38:55(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
score

Originally Posted by: achrn Go to Quoted Post

I wouldn't deem that scandalous.

I'd consider it pretty dozy to submit an application to purchase a service without reading the T&Cs for that service, though.

achrn, i dont post on this site verry much but take a keen interest and basically log in almost every day, it will be a while before i will post again due to the reply you decided to post, was there any need to be so rude?

achrn  
#6 Posted : 08 November 2019 14:15:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
achrn

Originally Posted by: score Go to Quoted Post

Originally Posted by: achrn Go to Quoted Post

I wouldn't deem that scandalous.

I'd consider it pretty dozy to submit an application to purchase a service without reading the T&Cs for that service, though.

achrn, i dont post on this site verry much but take a keen interest and basically log in almost every day, it will be a while before i will post again due to the reply you decided to post, was there any need to be so rude?

That wasn't rude. 

Obviosuly consumers get quite a lot of protection and quite often succeed in overturning T&Cs that they manage to persuade someone are 'unreasonable', but a business-to-business contract doesn't come with most of those protections.

If a business signs up to a contract that says it will provide information within a two week window, then doesn't provide that information (for whatever reason) and consequently loses any benefit from whatever the business paid, I don't think the business has any grounds for complaint.  Two weeks is a reasonable window (and certainly not scandalous), but even if it was unreasonable then it would be incumbent on the business to get the contract changed.

It is, in my opinion, unwise, foolhardy, cavalier and silly not to read the T&Cs for a service being bought, especially in a business-to-business situation.  'Dozy' seems entirely apposite.

Out of interest, when dealing with its own clients, does this business always provide whatever the customer wants, over whatever timescale the customer chooses, regardless of what the business has budgeted for?  Does this business enter contracts with clients?  Does it expect clients to meet their obligations therein?

Zyggy  
#7 Posted : 08 November 2019 15:56:15(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Zyggy

CHAS was initially "born" at the London Borough of Merton if my memory serves me well. It was actually an attempt to reduce bureaucracy by reducing the time & effort that companies had to make when submitting tenders to various potential clients. At the time, the scheme was very much welcomed by many people, myself included. Then things moved on a pace where there were a variety of similar schemes which saw the rise of SSIP, supported by the HSE. However, somewhere along the line things have become over complicated & from several personal experiences of certain schemes, I believe it's time for a radical rethink.
Mark-W  
#8 Posted : 11 November 2019 11:32:20(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Mark-W

1 of my clients used to be acredited to CHAS, but gave it up a few years ago. They now use, SafeContractor and ConstructionLine and used to use EXOR.

If the 10 day rule was rigidly enforced then they'd be buggered. I only work a couple of days a month for them and it could be a lot longer than 10 days between my days.

With the best will in the world you will miss info off on applications like this.

craigroberts76  
#9 Posted : 13 November 2019 14:43:11(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
craigroberts76

I do accreditations for clients and CHAS is ridiculus,picky and even if it comes back with an issue to be looked at, once resubmitted, more issues can be found as a different set of eyes seem to read them.

Construction line is now going in the same direction, both portals are so slow to use too.  On construction line they will not audit levels 2,3,4 until the previous one has been deemed as suitable and passed, this slows down the whole process of too-ing and frowing.

thanks 1 user thanked craigroberts76 for this useful post.
score on 14/11/2019(UTC)
Mark-W  
#10 Posted : 13 November 2019 14:58:36(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Mark-W

Originally Posted by: craigroberts76 Go to Quoted Post

I do accreditations for clients and CHAS is ridiculus,picky and even if it comes back with an issue to be looked at, once resubmitted, more issues can be found as a different set of eyes seem to read them.

Construction line is now going in the same direction, both portals are so slow to use too.  On construction line they will not audit levels 2,3,4 until the previous one has been deemed as suitable and passed, this slows down the whole process of too-ing and frowing.

And when you submit your paperwork they say, it'll take 6 weeks to process (I can't remember the exact timeframe) but if you want to pay us some money we can do it quicker for you.

So why not do it quicker for me anyway or are your clients just a big cashpoint to you.

thanks 1 user thanked Mark-W for this useful post.
SJP on 15/11/2019(UTC)
achrn  
#11 Posted : 14 November 2019 08:20:16(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
achrn

Originally Posted by: Mark-W Go to Quoted Post

And when you submit your paperwork they say, it'll take 6 weeks to process (I can't remember the exact timeframe) but if you want to pay us some money we can do it quicker for you.

So why not do it quicker for me anyway or are your clients just a big cashpoint to you.

Don't look here: https://www.gov.uk/get-a...-week-fast-track-service

Or here: https://www.amazon.co.uk...16280_2?nodeId=202016280

Or even here: https://www.royalmail.com/sending/uk

There are many things wrong with the competence assessment industry, but having deadlines for reponding to queries and an option to pay for an expedited service are not two of them.

thanks 1 user thanked achrn for this useful post.
SJP on 15/11/2019(UTC)
Gordy393  
#12 Posted : 02 December 2019 07:34:45(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Gordy393

I take care of our Constructionline accreditation and it is a constant pain i'm constantly trying to update it at various times, whenever a new set or updated set of questions come out they have to be filled out sent off and then wait for them to be verified, it takes even longer with the Acclaim H&S sections. Its also worth noting that through all this some company's still send out their own PQQ's to fill out, most frustrating really.

Ressler  
#13 Posted : 07 December 2019 02:00:39(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Ressler

I have just completed a CHAS application for one of my clients and was shocked to see that once they applied and sent in their application if further information was rpcpartpickerequired they had a time limit of 10 days to resend the application?nba reddit

They paid in full at the beginning of the process and could of potentially have lost that money if they went on holiday or were off work sick etc.. i think that is scandalous!  reverse phone lookup

 

i agree!!!

peter gotch  
#14 Posted : 08 December 2019 15:29:33(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Lots of problems with all these accreditation schemes but putting a limit on 10 days for submission of additional information doesn't seem to me to be particularly onerous, unless of course the applicant is so heavily reliant on an external consultant that they only want to pay once in a blue moon.

The baby applicant who might only need support from an external consultant on a very occasional basis shouldn't really need to them to be readily available when the request for additional information is received. Their systems are either good enough to reflect the nature of their organisation or they are not. Having an external consultant on hand to make up some fiction at short notice is NOT a solution - it's a recipe for cheating.

Users browsing this topic
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.