The Considerate Constructors Scheme’s aim is to improve the image of construction by raising standards of construction sites, companies and suppliers through the monitoring of their activities. The Scheme establishes the levels of performance through monitoring and providing a score against the Scheme’s Code of Considerate Practice. Those that register with the Scheme are expected to attain levels of at least compliance with the Code of Considerate Practice. This non-compliance process describes how the Scheme deals with instances of non-compliance.
The Checklist contains 5 sections each with a number of bold ‘compliance’ questions and a number of non-bold ‘beyond compliance’ questions. Each section of the Checklist is scored out of 10 points with a score of 5 indicating compliance.
All questions highlighted in bold on the Checklist must be satisfactorily addressed in order for the site to achieve compliance which indicates that a site has reached a standard beyond statutory requirements.
Any site which fails to adequately address all bold compliance questions in a section, to the Monitor’s satisfaction, will be awarded a non-compliant score for that section, regardless of any other positive activities or initiatives undertaken relevant to that section. The non-compliant score to be awarded will depend on the nature and severity of the issues identified.
Non-compliance and Disciplinary Process
|Minor non-compliance||A bold item on the Checklist has not been satisfactorily addressed demonstrating minor non-compliance with the Scheme’s Code of Considerate Practice. The area highlighted reflects unfavourably on the construction industry; however, it is deemed to be minor and should be quickly and easily addressed.||4|
If a site is deemed to be ‘minor non-compliant’ and receives a score of 4 in any one section of the Monitor’s Site Report, the Scheme will write to the site highlighting the area(s) of non-compliance requiring attention and will request that appropriate action is taken to address the issue(s) highlighted. No confirmation will be required by the Scheme in these cases. However, if a site chooses to provide evidence that the issues have been addressed and that compliance has been achieved, this can be reviewed by the Monitor and an amended report produced, subject to a charge of £170 + VAT.
|Major non-compliance||More than one bold item on the Checklist has not been satisfactorily addressed demonstrating major non-compliance with the Scheme’s Code of Considerate Practice. The areas highlighted reflect poorly on the construction industry and should be dealt with immediately to address the negative impact on the image of construction.||3|
|Failure||Several bold items on the Checklist have not been satisfactorily addressed demonstrating a failure to achieve compliance with the Scheme’s Code of Considerate Practice. The areas highlighted reflect seriously on the construction industry and should be dealt with immediately to address the negative impact on the image of construction.||2|
If the score awarded is ‘failure’ or ‘major non-compliant’, receiving a score of 2 or 3 in any section of the report, the Scheme will write to the site highlighting the area(s) of non-compliance and will request that appropriate action is taken to address the issue(s) highlighted in a timely manner.
For such instances, the Scheme will require confirmation that the issues highlighted have been addressed and a revisit to site with therefore be scheduled to take place 6 to 8 weeks later, following which an updated report and score will be issued.
|Gross failure||The majority of bold items on the Checklist have not been satisfactorily addressed demonstrating a gross failure to achieve compliance with the Scheme’s Code of Considerate Practice. The areas highlighted reflect gravely on the construction industry and should be dealt with immediately to address the negative impact on the image of construction.||1|
If the site is scored as ‘gross failure’ and receives 1 point in a section of the report, the Scheme will write to the site highlighting the areas of non-compliance requiring attention and will request that appropriate action is taken to address the issues highlighted as a matter of urgency.
For instances of gross failure, the Scheme will request a meeting at the company’s office to discuss the issues highlighted in the report and the Scheme’s minimum requirements. Following this meeting, the Scheme will conduct a further visit to the site, after an appropriate period of time has elapsed, so that a Scheme Monitor can confirm that the issues have been fully and properly addressed, and produce an updated report and score.
Multiple non-compliance issues
Where the Monitor identifies more than one instance of non-compliance, the lowest score awarded in any section will normally determine the process to be followed. However, several instances of minor non-compliance could indicate a fundamental lack of understanding or commitment, and it may be appropriate for additional action to be undertaken. These instances will be reviewed by the Scheme’s General Manager and a course of action agreed.
Confirmation of compliance
When a site is deemed to have demonstrated minor non-compliance, the Scheme does not formally require confirmation that the issues have been addressed. However, if the site does wish to be reassessed, the Monitor will be asked whether a revisit to site is required or whether the site can simply provide evidence that compliance has been achieved which can be reviewed without visiting the site.
Where a reassessment is requested, the default position will normally be to conduct a revisit to the site. However, the Monitor may feel that a revisit is not necessary and that the site could provide evidence to demonstrate that compliance has been attained, e.g. a photo of a banner/poster being displayed.
After reassessing the site, either by reviewing the evidence provided, or by revisiting the site, the Monitor will produce an updated report. If the Monitor is not happy that compliance has been demonstrated, the Scheme will write to the site again to request that further action is taken before the site can be reassessed (see ‘continued non-compliance below). When the Monitor is happy that the issue has been addressed, and that compliance has been confirmed, the Scheme will write to the site to confirm that it is satisfied that the appropriate action has been taken and that no additional action is required. The amended report will be issued and, where appropriate, a Certificate of Compliance will also be issued.
If compliance is not achieved at the first revisit to site, the Scheme will write to the site stressing the need to attain compliance and highlighting that this is a mandatory requirement of continued registration. The Scheme will also write to the main company contact bringing this continued non-compliance to their attention.
A second revisit will be scheduled after sufficient time has been given for the site to take action.
If the second revisit does not demonstrate that compliance has been achieved, the Scheme will write to the site and main company contact to confirm that the site details will be passed to the General Manager to decide what further action, if any, is appropriate or to consider whether the site’s registration should be cancelled.
If the General Manager does decide that the site should be removed from the Scheme, they will refer the matter to the Chairman of the Scheme’s Service & Performance Committee Chairman who will review the circumstances and make a final decision on whether the site’s registration should be cancelled.
Where the Service & Performance Committee Chairman’s decision is to remove the site from the Scheme, the company will be informed in writing, with the client copied in. The site must then remove all evidence of registration on that site.
If a site achieves minor non-compliance (4) at the first visit, no revisit will necessarily be undertaken. However, if they continue to demonstrate non-compliance at the subsequent visit, the normal non-compliance process will now apply.
Scheme Appeals Panel
The Considerate Constructors Scheme has established an appeals panel of experienced Monitors who will review any formal appeals received from a site whose registration with the Scheme has been cancelled following a breach of the Code of Considerate Practice.
If a site wishes to appeal, they must do so within 3 months of receipt of the letter from the Service & Performance Committee Chairman confirming their removal from the Scheme, and the decision to appeal must be confirmed in writing. The site must also confirm in writing their reasons for disagreeing with the decision to remove them from the Scheme as this document will form the basis of the appeal.
Once this written confirmation has been received, it will be passed to the panel along with copies of all reports completed on that site and all relevant correspondence. The panel will review all of the information and make a formal decision as to whether the removal of the site was correct. If they support the original decision, they will confirm their decision in writing with a detailed explanation as to why they have done so. If they agree that the decision to remove the site was incorrect, the site will be reinstated immediately and this will be confirmed in writing.
If the site disagrees with the panel’s findings, they may proceed to a second independent panel as detailed below.
CIC Independent Appeals Process
The Construction Industry Council (CIC) has established an independent Appeals Tribunal for its member bodies. The Considerate Constructors Scheme (CCS) has subscribed to this service.
The Appeals Tribunal may only be used for appeals against the decisions made by the disciplinary body of the CCS. The Appeals Tribunal may be used in full or part at the discretion of the CCS, subject to their own requirements. The Tribunal cannot be used in instances where the CCS’s disciplinary body has found no case to answer.
Applications for a hearing of the Appeals Tribunal shall be made direct to the CIC when a site wishes to appeal against a decision by the CCS’s disciplinary body. The request must be received by the CIC within three months of the date of the letter from the CCS rejecting the appeal. The CIC will then issue the prescribed application form to the appellant together with additional information. When the completed form has been returned, it will be referred to the CCS with a request for an initial response within six weeks. A copy of the initial response by the CCS will be sent to the appellant.
Applications and initial responses will be considered by the Tribunal Management Board Chairman and an independent panel member, to decide if the grounds for the appeal are within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. If the grounds for the appeal are accepted, a hearing will be arranged and the parties notified.
The CCS will advise the CIC as soon as they are aware that an appeal may be made against one of their decisions.
Facts to be aware of:
- The parties may be represented at their own cost.
- If one or both parties fail to attend the hearing, it shall be continued in their absence unless there is a good reason to adjourn.
- The hearing shall be in public but the tribunal members will withdraw to discuss their decision.
- The public proceedings of the tribunal will be recorded.
The Tribunal shall:
- decide if the CCS unfairly terminated the registration of a site as a result of the performance of the site;
- decide if the CCS unfairly terminated the registration of a site as a result of complaints made against the site;
- refer the matter to the CCS if new evidence is produced that was not submitted to the disciplinary body of the CCS, and which the tribunal considers could not reasonably have been produced at the disciplinary hearing;
- ratify or recommend a variation of the sanction imposed by the CCS.
The Tribunal may award CIC costs against:
- the appellant alone; or
- the CCS alone; or
- the appellant and the CCS in proportions decided by the Tribunal.
Following the hearing the Tribunal shall:
- issue a reasoned judgment;
- provide copy to the CCS and the appellant.