PURA
Compliance Baseline
Detailed Assessment & Action Plan
Riverside Engineering Ltd
- Assessment date
- 12 August 2026
- Baseline reference
- PURA-SAMPLE-RE-001
- Rules/version
- A001-RULES-0.4-INTEGRITY-2026-08-25
Your current position
What this assessment found
6 assessed controls were indicated as in place, and we identified 4 matters requiring action or confirmation. 0 are source-backed legal-duty gaps and 3 need evidence or confirmation.
We interpreted the operating facts you supplied against the stated source set. The result distinguishes identified legal-duty gaps, potential control gaps and matters that cannot be concluded without evidence.
Your assessment at a glance
Pura Business Compliance Score49Readiness signal, not percentage legally compliant
Reviewed evidence coverage0%0 of 10 applicable areas have relevant clean, assessed documents
Answer certainty70%Decisive supplied answers; not document or site verification
Priority findings2Unresolved higher-priority matters
Legal compliance gaps0Source-backed applicable duties
Actions identified4Practical routes to strengthen your position
The Pura Business Compliance Score is an internal readiness indicator. It is not certification, a statutory rating or a percentage legally compliant. Evidence coverage records documents Pura has safely processed and mapped; it does not by itself establish their adequacy or prove a control works.
Your route forward
4 actions identified to strengthen your current compliance position
0address first
3need information or evidence
1planned control improvements
This is an action count from the scope assessed, not a claim that completing it proves universal compliance or certification.
Priority findings
- Work-equipment maintenanceCONFIRMATION REQUIRED — Check equipment suitability, maintenance and safe condition; obtain competent advice where needed.
- Lifting-equipment examination evidenceCONFIRMATION REQUIRED — Locate the latest report and address any defects before relying on the equipment.
Legal compliance gaps
No source-backed legal-duty gap was established from the supplied facts. This does not prove universal legal compliance.
Potential compliance gaps
Evidence retrievalPOTENTIAL COMPLIANCE GAP
What we found: Your answer indicates a control may be missing or incomplete. The answer indicates whether current records can be located; poor retrieval does not by itself prove the underlying controls are absent or ineffective.
What it means: The current information indicates a weakness, but does not establish a specific legal breach.
Evidence to locate: An organised, retrievable set of current records.
Action that closes this finding: Create a simple register of owners, review dates and locations for key evidence.
Potential exposure if unresolved: customer audit or tender weakness; insurance or evidential weakness. The relevant outcome depends on the actual circumstances and evidence.
Evidence boundary: This finding uses the answer supplied and does not verify the underlying record or site condition.
The good news is that this is an identifiable issue with a clear route to resolution.
Authoritative source: SRC-HSE-MANAGINGConfirmation required
Work-equipment maintenanceCONFIRMATION REQUIRED
What we found: The information supplied was not sufficient to confirm this control. The answer establishes whether the business has a process for checking and maintaining work equipment; it does not verify any individual item.
What it means: Do not treat this as non-compliance. Locate the evidence or obtain the information before reaching a conclusion.
Evidence to locate: Maintenance or inspection records for relevant equipment.
Action that closes this finding: Check equipment suitability, maintenance and safe condition; obtain competent advice where needed.
Evidence boundary: This finding uses the answer supplied and does not verify the underlying record or site condition.
The good news is that this is an identifiable issue with a clear route to resolution.
Authoritative source: SRC-HSE-PUWERLifting-equipment examination evidenceCONFIRMATION REQUIRED
What we found: The information supplied was not sufficient to confirm this control. The answer establishes whether current examination records are kept; the assessment does not assume equipment type or invent examination intervals.
What it means: Do not treat this as non-compliance. Locate the evidence or obtain the information before reaching a conclusion.
Evidence to locate: Current thorough-examination reports and closed defect actions.
Action that closes this finding: Locate the latest report and address any defects before relying on the equipment.
Evidence boundary: This finding uses the answer supplied and does not verify the underlying record or site condition.
The good news is that this is an identifiable issue with a clear route to resolution.
Authoritative source: SRC-HSE-LOLERContractor coordinationCONFIRMATION REQUIRED
What we found: The information supplied was not sufficient to confirm this control. The answer indicates whether a process exists for coordinating contractors and shared work risks; the limited facts do not establish a specific legal breach.
What it means: Do not treat this as non-compliance. Locate the evidence or obtain the information before reaching a conclusion.
Evidence to locate: Contractor selection, coordination and risk-information records.
Action that closes this finding: Review how contractor competence and shared risks are checked and coordinated.
Evidence boundary: This finding uses the answer supplied and does not verify the underlying record or site condition.
The good news is that this is an identifiable issue with a clear route to resolution.
Authoritative source: SRC-HSE-MANAGINGWhat appears to be in place
Risk assessment foundationsYour explicit answer indicates this control is in place. Pura has not verified the control or its supporting evidence unless reviewed evidence is identified separately.
Written health and safety policyYour explicit answer indicates this control is in place. Pura has not verified the control or its supporting evidence unless reviewed evidence is identified separately.
Responsibilities and arrangementsYour explicit answer indicates this control is in place. Pura has not verified the control or its supporting evidence unless reviewed evidence is identified separately.
First-aid arrangementsYour explicit answer indicates this control is in place. Pura has not verified the control or its supporting evidence unless reviewed evidence is identified separately.
Equipment information and trainingYour explicit answer indicates this control is in place. Pura has not verified the control or its supporting evidence unless reviewed evidence is identified separately.
Lifting-operation competenceYour explicit answer indicates this control is in place. Pura has not verified the control or its supporting evidence unless reviewed evidence is identified separately.
Evidence checklist
Each item below is tied to an applicable assessed area. Its label distinguishes self-declared controls from gaps and unanswered matters; inclusion does not mean the document was supplied.
- Supporting evidence to retain for a self-declared control: Current risk assessments for significant work risks.
- Supporting evidence to retain for a self-declared control: Current written health and safety policy and arrangements.
- Supporting evidence to retain for a self-declared control: Named responsibility and practical arrangements.
- Supporting evidence to retain for a self-declared control: First-aid needs assessment, equipment and responsible arrangements.
- Evidence needed to confirm the position: Maintenance or inspection records for relevant equipment.
- Supporting evidence to retain for a self-declared control: User instructions, training and competence records.
- Evidence needed to confirm the position: Current thorough-examination reports and closed defect actions.
- Supporting evidence to retain for a self-declared control: Planning, supervision and competence evidence.
- Evidence needed to confirm the position: Contractor selection, coordination and risk-information records.
- Close-out evidence needed after action: An organised, retrievable set of current records.
Detailed compliance action plan
- Locate the latest report and address any defects before relying on the equipment.Address first and set a prompt, risk-appropriate target · Suggested owner: business owner or nominated competent person.Close-out evidence: Current thorough-examination reports and closed defect actions.
- Check equipment suitability, maintenance and safe condition; obtain competent advice where needed.Address first and set a prompt, risk-appropriate target · Suggested owner: business owner or nominated competent person.Close-out evidence: Maintenance or inspection records for relevant equipment.
- Review how contractor competence and shared risks are checked and coordinated.Locate evidence or confirm the facts · Suggested owner: business owner or nominated competent person.Close-out evidence: Contractor selection, coordination and risk-information records.
- Create a simple register of owners, review dates and locations for key evidence.Plan and track as a control improvement · Suggested owner: business owner or nominated competent person.Close-out evidence: An organised, retrievable set of current records.
Source and evidence references
About this assessment
Information is based on the answers supplied. This is a structured compliance-readiness assessment, not statutory certification, an audit, legal advice or proof that controls are effective. Applicability and adequacy can depend on the work, equipment, people and circumstances; specialist competent-person review may still be required.
Keep this report with your review records, verify the evidence listed, and update your arrangements when the business or work changes.