30th December 2006, 03:33 PM
One should point out that Archaeological Solutions state that they removed themselves until such times as they felt able to rejoin the RAO scheme.
I note that sadly the website http://www.arch-sol.co.uk/ has been snatched .. I do note on the IFA website that they have indeed returned as an RAO. This would mean that the IFA have carried out a visit and inspection to ensure that all the problems that caused the initial removal of RAO status have been (or are being) dealt with to the satisfacton of the IFA. So although it may look like same staff - "same standards" - there would have to be changes or the RAO scheme would be a sham... After all what would be the point for a company to have RAO status if there were no benefits to the return.?
There is no point in 'banning' people for ever either... but there is a point to helping organisations to succeed. Thats what the RAO scheme is about. It would be a blow to the RAOs , the IFA and others if it was shown that RAO status was not representative of a standard that had to be adhered to and could be relied on.
The IFA made a statement on their website at the time.. and as is now clear, after a year away, they have managed to regain RAO status.... which is surely a good thing....
BAJR for example had no problem letting Arch Sol. advertise during the time they were not RAOs.. - perhaps a more serious 'ban' would be a removal from BAJR and no advertising allowed.?
I prefer to be charitable... if however you know anything about a company that you feel should be known.. contact the relevant group directly.
Oh... and happy christmas to you too muddy...
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
I note that sadly the website http://www.arch-sol.co.uk/ has been snatched .. I do note on the IFA website that they have indeed returned as an RAO. This would mean that the IFA have carried out a visit and inspection to ensure that all the problems that caused the initial removal of RAO status have been (or are being) dealt with to the satisfacton of the IFA. So although it may look like same staff - "same standards" - there would have to be changes or the RAO scheme would be a sham... After all what would be the point for a company to have RAO status if there were no benefits to the return.?
There is no point in 'banning' people for ever either... but there is a point to helping organisations to succeed. Thats what the RAO scheme is about. It would be a blow to the RAOs , the IFA and others if it was shown that RAO status was not representative of a standard that had to be adhered to and could be relied on.
The IFA made a statement on their website at the time.. and as is now clear, after a year away, they have managed to regain RAO status.... which is surely a good thing....
BAJR for example had no problem letting Arch Sol. advertise during the time they were not RAOs.. - perhaps a more serious 'ban' would be a removal from BAJR and no advertising allowed.?
I prefer to be charitable... if however you know anything about a company that you feel should be known.. contact the relevant group directly.
Oh... and happy christmas to you too muddy...
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu