RAMS rejection checker
Paste your risk assessment and method statement — or upload the PDF — and add any reviewer comments if it has already been sent back.
- Practical check
- Free
- Review before use
Free to use — no signup. Your document text is sent securely to the RamsDocs review service for analysis only; it isn't stored as a document or used for training.
Reviewed like a PC would
takes about a minute
Check the detail here, then carry it into the RAMS
This tool helps with one part of the paperwork. The builder brings the task, method, hazards, evidence prompts and sign-off together in the full RAMS draft.
RAMS builder
Choose the work, add site details, answer risk triggers, review gaps and export a PDF draft.
Open the builder →176 templatesTemplate library
Find task-specific RAMS starting points by trade, task, hazard or permit trigger.
Find a template →49 toolsFree tools
Use checkers, permits, calculators and document builders alongside the RAMS workflow.
Use free tools →Paste your RAMS, or upload the PDF
Paste the full text of the document you're about to submit. It gets reviewed on the eight checks principal contractors look at first.
Already sent back by a client?
Paste their comments here as well. RamsDocs will use them as context for the review and record the rejection reason so future RAMS can pre-empt it.
Sent securely for analysis only — not stored as a document, not used for training. Remove personal data you don't want sent.
What this checker actually does
Unlike a checklist you tick through yourself, this tool reads the document you are actually about to submit. It reviews the text the way a principal contractor's document controller does on first pass: is it specific to this site and this task, does the method read as a real sequence of work, do the controls go higher than PPE, and are the people, briefings and emergency arrangements named and evidenced.
The review draws on the RamsDocs knowledge bank of principal-contractor expectations and documented rejection reasons, so the findings reflect what real reviewers send documents back for — not a generic AI opinion.
The eight checks
- Site specificity — named site, dates, access, interfaces; no recycled content.
- Method sequence — a real step-by-step with access, isolation and hold points.
- Hierarchy of controls — eliminate and reduce before PPE-only controls.
- Permits & high-risk work — hot works, digging, height, confined spaces covered.
- COSHH — substances assessed, not just mentioned.
- Competence — named people, valid tickets, supervision.
- Emergency arrangements — first aid, rescue plans where harnesses appear, contacts.
- Briefing & sign-off — document control, signatures, workforce briefing evidence.
What it doesn't do
It does not certify your RAMS, guarantee acceptance, or replace your competent person's review. Acceptance is always the principal contractor's decision. Treat the verdict as a pre-submission rehearsal: fix the criticals, tidy the majors, then have a competent person make the final call.
Privacy: the text you paste is sent to the RamsDocs review service to be analysed and is not used to train models. If your document contains personal data you don't want sent, remove it first — the review doesn't need names to score the document (though "a named supervisor" being present matters).
RamsDocs helps draft structured RAMS from your job details. It does not replace competent-person review, site-specific judgement or your legal duties.
Need the full RAMS, not just the numbers?
Build the RAMS, add the site details, then review it before client submission.
Answer a few questions about the project and see your CDM 2015 duties — and whether it's F10 notifiable.
Run your RAMS against the checks principal contractors commonly make before review and sign-off.
Check your policies, RAMS, insurance and records against what CHAS-style SSIP assessments ask for.