It's what's technically known as the 'slippery shoulder' approach or ' passing the buck'; pass it to the insurance company for their approval or HR/Occupation Health is also a common one. God forbid you get a Health & Safety Manager/Adviser/Officer to give a definitive instruction, much like the HSE. That way if it goes tits up we can't be held liable or at fault....did that come across as to sarcastic?

Whilst you might not want to consult your Insurer, you might want to use your Broker who might well have some expertise, and could also assist you in complying or challenging any Insuer requirements. An example could be where an Insurer insists on annual PAT or prohibitive and expensive conditions.

Certainly working in the HE Sector I would never turn to the insurers for advice. In general they had little understanding of the work we were undertaking and I found that when they carried out the annual inspections the advice offered was often inappropriate and in some cases misleading. Yes they had a good understanding of the sort of workshop and office problems. I am not being critical of the insures but simply highlighting their limitations. If I was seeking advice I would turn to colleagues in other universities, fortunately we had a well-developed network and in most cases knew each other. So were able to discuss, in confidence, any problems we were encountering.

All - thev only circumstances I have referred people to check with our insurance manager has been in cases such as Jake describes. There may be insurance requirements that are over and above the H&S requirements and they need to be considered when making decisions. In defence of insurance brokers - I have had some very positive experiences with my present (and previous) brokers where they have worked closely with us and our contractors to identify support and resources to improve H&S risk management and reduce claims/premiums.

Ray, I take your point but in my experience it is not asking for advice, rather asking what the current conditions of the insurance policy are. I also agree that insurance co's are over cautions, but the fact is, if an organisation has an insurance policy through company X then they need to meet the T's&C's, if these T's&C's are too onerous then the company needs to renegotiate when they next get a chance. I haven't approach an insurance company for any reason other than to determine the T's&C's - and these are often more prescriptive than legislation (and in fact I've identified where a term needs to be renegotiated as it swings too far away from reasonable practicable). I would agree that asking for general advice not related to the terms of the insurance policy would not be a wise move, as clearly the insurance company have an agenda.

Jake, fair point re T&Cs of the policy - agree it's not strictly advice per se.

I second (third?) this - as this was my meaning also! Good to know we can communicate clearly!!

We all have different backgrounds and have had different experiences. That is why the forum is so useful as you will get a range of responses and opinions - very few things are purely black or white!

I’ve been on holiday so unable to respond to the thread on asking for advice from insurers. So apologies for a long and late response but there are a few comments I would make in response to the many points made. • Who answered the question: Insurers are generally pretty large organisations so it might depend who answered the query as to the level of usefulness of the response. With the best will in the world if the answer came from an underwriter it is possible that they had a) limited knowledge of H&S and b) did not possess any particular knowledge or experience of real world scenarios. It is also possible that they had little or no knowledge of your particular organisation. That is not to cast any slight upon such persons but simply to state the reality. • Insurer’s “Experts”: Many insurers have teams of people who provide advice to policyholders There will be a range of knowledge and expertise amongst such people. However, some such people will be generalists rather than specialising in H&S matters even if highly qualified and experienced. But generally those dealing with H&S matters will be suitably qualified. However, they may not have the luxury of having worked in an industry sector for many years. So, we had better be careful if we are alleging that such people are not providing suitable feedback. As indicted in 1) above a key factor could well be whether the individual answering your query has knowledge of your particular operations. So if you have been visited by an insurer’s risk management adviser try to put you question directly to them. At least they will have visited your premises! • Ask the right question: As some postings on this very forum reveal if the question asked isn’t well framed or constructed then the answer will not necessarily be of any use. • Criminal vs. Civil: It has to be borne in mind that most employers will want to stay on the right side of the law. But the advice given by an insurer may well be more directed towards civil liability. And they are not 100% aligned. A NEBOSH Diploma holder working for an insurer will be able to give you both views, but they may differ and again it may depend on how the question is framed It also has to be borne in mind that there are contractual duties associated with insurance and these may not necessarily line up with criminal duties. But that doesn’t mean that insurers shouldn’t point out such additional matters out to you nor that they can be ignored. • So like many things this is a complex issue. I’d like to think that most insurers provide reasonable advice but there may well be times when the isn’t quite what the questioner expected. And this could be because o The question was badly phrased o The person supplying the answer hasn’t understood the question or the local circumstance OR o There are sound reasons for advice based on civil law to seem out of step with the requirements of criminal law. Remember: The Govt seems hell bent on reducing the paperwork required under H&S legislation. But in order to defend a civil claim it will still be necessary to prove that risks were identified and assessed, control actions identified and implemented, training delivered and PPE supplied and its use enforced. Sorry for the length of this reply… well done to all who have made it to this point!

I too have just spotted this thread. As a consultant who carries out work for some insurers and also my own book of clients I believe that the question as originally asked is "it depends" It depends on the individual person responding to the query and also to the insurers attitude to customer service. In some instances the individual will be a highly competent and experienced risk management professional who understands that real-life work situations may not always fit the standard approach, whereas others may merely issue a pre-prepared generic response. When I worked for an insurance broker, one of the factors that affected our recommendations on which insurer's products to use in any given circumstance was the quality of its risk management advice and whether the client was likely to need that advice or had sufficient internal expertise to be able to make their own decisions on such matters. Some insurers have great advisors, others do not.