Risk Assessment/Method Statement (RAMS) Rejection Rescue
Fix Rejected RAMS so Contractors Can Re-submit with Confidence
Why Do Risk Assessment/Method Statements (RAMS) Get Rejected?
RAMS are often rejected because they are too generic, too vague, or not site specific enough to the actual job site. A lot of documents explain what work will be done, but not how it will be completed safely.
Common reasons include:
They describe the task, but not the safe system of work.
The method section is too thin on detail.
Controls are generic rather than site-specific.
They do not reflect the actual conditions, risks, or constraints on site.
Equipment, plant, and tools are missing or not clearly linked to the method.
A good set of RAMS should show a clear, step-by-step way the work will be done safely on that specific site. If it does not do that, it is much more likely to come back with comments or be rejected.
What Do We Do?
When your Risk Assement/Method Statement (RAMS) have been rejected or keep coming back with comments, we focus on the points reviewers actually care about.
We:
Review your current RAMS to see where the method and risk assessment is weak, too generic, or missing a clear safe system of work.
Tighten the wording and formatting so it explains how the work will be done safely, not just what will be done.
Add or sharpen the step‑by‑step method, control measures, site‑specific details, and any missing plant or tools.
Make sure the document clearly reflects the real site conditions, risks, and constraints, so it reads like it belongs on that job.
The result is a set or RAMS which is easier to approve and less likely to come back with additional comments.