Posted By peter gotch Hi employed H&S guys and guyesses, How many of you do the odd bit of consultancy at the weekend, paid or not. Recent case of employee of construction consultancy doing a homer and giving negligent advice. Claim against the consultancy was upheld on appeal despite their argument that they [and thence their Professional Indemnity Insurers] had zero commercial or other interest. In our internal video on Risk management in Design and Build our broker's qualified lawyer and engineer comments that PII is "to protect the unfortunate, not the careless", recognising that whilst you may be advising on a matter which you know about, it does not prevent you making the odd mistake. Doesn't mean you need personal insurance, but does mean that you may be uninsured for your outside work, or that your employer might be at risk if the case gets to those with an understanding of recent appeal decisions. Not conducive to an increase in your annual bonus or your promotion prospects? Peter

Posted By Dave Wilson Hello Peter me old fruit! Don't know the case if you could email or let me know where I cann read. Could it be as that this chap was already a 'consultant' that it could be construed that he was getting a paid benefit (Homer in your words) and did he do this with the knowledge of his employer?, therefore could be seen to be 'at work' and under the direction of his employer? I seriously do not belive that non - formal advice given to a friend or charity etc where no cash has changed hands could actully put my employer 'at risk' therfore no 'contract'. What you do in your own time without your employers knowledge outside of your contracted working hours has nothing to do with your employer, as long as you are not utilising his equipment / premises / or intellectual property rights. Remember if you are employed as a HS&E persona and produce documentation / policies etc for them as part of your job it belongs to the employer and not to you!

Posted By Jonathan Breeze I'm confused over what is being said here. Was it the 'homer' that was wrong or the giving of the advice (good or otherwise)? How does this relate to e.g. IOSH Discussion forums, will we all have to sign a disclaimer or take out an insurance policy? Please could somone forward me details of the case.

Posted By Geoff Burt I think I must be missing the message here somehow or we don't have enough information. My thoughts in a hypothetical situation would be: Scenario 1: A consultancy provides H&S advice, guidance and so on. It also provides the same sort of advice free of charge to, let's say voluntary bodies. Surely the consultancy is still liable for the accuracy of that advice whether paid for or not. A recent example was some risk assessments for a Parish Council - I would expect the consultancy to be liable for those just as they are for paying clients. Scenario 2: An employee of this consultancy gives advice free of charge (your homer scenario as far as I can understand it???) to say, a school, a charity or whatever with consultancy consent - so the consultancy is still liable. Scenario 3: An employee gives the same sort of advice completely on his own without consultancy consent - then that is the employee's affair and nothing to do with the consultancy and the employee will be liable. I'm guessing a bit here but Peter's scenario sounds like number 1 or 2 to me. If it is then I can't see what the argument is. If it is number 3 then Peter's advice with reference to insurance sounds like good sense! Or as they say in Yorkshire 'tha better off knowin nowt abaht nothin' then you can't get into trouble! Geoff

Posted By peter gotch Geoff Your scenario no 3. Can't rememember case title but widely reported in the construction press some time ago and causing real concern amongst construction consultants! Peter

Posted By Raymond Rapp 'The law is an ass' (Bumble, 1850), nothing has changed much! It seems absurd that your employer could be liable if as a consultant you gave advice in your own time. Surely it is better to take advice from someone who is 'competent' rather than someone who is not, or no advice. Take a scenario where advice was given free of charge, would a disclaimer stating that that 'no liability is accepted' prevent a claim? Try taking a surveyor to court for negligent advice, even though you have paid for it, no chance!