2nd January 2007, 06:18 PM
Troll is right in that the wording certainly appears to provide some sort of promise that work commissioned from an RAO will be done to a satisfactory standard - perhaps the wording does needd to be revised before a legal challenge comes through from a disgruntled punter.
1m1d is also correct in that removal from the RAO scheme can be a useful sanction - as a consultant I usually look to recommend to clients that they use an RAO for any fieldwork that might be required. If a contractor has been de-registered then thay would not be considered, and even after managing to re-register there may well be some lingering perception of malpractice or p***-poor management that would mean said contractor would not be included on any invitation to tender.
Beamo
1m1d is also correct in that removal from the RAO scheme can be a useful sanction - as a consultant I usually look to recommend to clients that they use an RAO for any fieldwork that might be required. If a contractor has been de-registered then thay would not be considered, and even after managing to re-register there may well be some lingering perception of malpractice or p***-poor management that would mean said contractor would not be included on any invitation to tender.
Beamo