So I have this clear:

Your company is being contracted by a principal who does not permit sub-contracting.

You are actually sub-contracting a task to others who have written the RAMS.

You are suggesting putting your logo on the other companies RAMS to disguise their origin to the principal.

NO it is not legal - it is falsification of records and could be considered fraudulent miss-representation.

Company logo's or names may actually be registered as a trademark. When they are its use should be agreed with the registered owner and the ownership acknowledged when it is used.

Too many small firms think a who's who of logos across the foot of their company letterhead looks impressive - for me it often points to a company who cannot be trusted to play by the rules. The big alarm bells are companies miss-using CE / UKCA and ISO.

Dont just change the logo. but try to write your own risk assessment using the other companies risk assessment data. but not to copy entire data. edit and add your own risk assessment and control methods. 

This is what the best as of now you can do. "not sure is this legal or not"

I'm not suggesting anything, have advised and given my thoughts on the legality of it. Was purely after other thoughts and opionions to back up what I have advised. So many thanks for the responses.

There are a lot of small companies who use subcontractors to undertake work for them, especially if it is specialist operations.

Fully appreciate there are many companies who sub-contract to specialists - if these businesses were a little more honest up front with the principal you would not be on here seeking opinon.

I used to work with one of those specialists who never got the main contract for works but invariably ended up doing the work with the non-specialist who was awarded the contract taking their cut off the top.

We had even been forced to buy main contractor liveried PPE to disguise who supplied the workforce at site.

It is a very strange concept for many but you can and, on occassion, should say No.

"No we don't do that... but we can find/know a firm who can".

firesafety101 

I think you have deviated from the question asked, but.....

Life in business is all about "WE" and when there is a supply chain, "WE" can include the family.

Suppose the Client gives a Contract to ABC Construction aka WE (and DOESN'T prohibit sub-contracting, which is a far more common scenario than the Client who DOES make that prohibition).

Suppose ABC Construction sub-contracts some heating and ventilation works to HNV.

I don't see any legal problem with WE doing the risk assessment and coming up with a method statement complete with the ABC Construction logo for work to be done by HNV (under appropriate oversight by ABC), if the content of the RAMS is adequate and IF AND ONLY IF the sub-contractor is happy that the RAMS sets out the output of a "suitable and sufficient" assessment of what HNV workers are to do.

IFF - as for many sub-contract activities ABC Construction are probably not competent to do a "suitable and sufficient" risk assessment for their sub-contractor.

But given that HNV is part of the family that is "WE", and particularly if ABC involves HNV is compiling the RAMS, I don't see a fundamental issue with HNV operating on the basis of a RAMS with clear indication that authorship and ownership lies with the head of the family, ABC Construction.