Rank: Forum user
|
Hi all - could anyone advise on what would be the typical level of cover a H & S consultant should take out for Public Liability Insurance and for Professional Indemnity Insurance? Also any guide on what premiums would be expected would be appreciated.
Thanks
FH
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
It depends..................I took out £2 million for each and it worked out about £280 or so PA
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The type of business that you wish to have covereed and your perceived level of competence will also have an effect.
ie - if you do "asbestos" other than general information, expect your premium to be considerably higher.
If you are perceived as lower down the competence scale by the prospective insurer, again, expect an increase in premiums.
My PII insurer keeps telling me that my premiums have actually gone down "in real terms"! Any guesses as to what that really means?
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I can't be of much help unfortunately, but I would imagine it largely depends on the risk associated with the industries you advise and your personal attitude to risk. If you under insure then I suppose that exposes you financially.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Have you read the free IOSH guide available under 'books & resources' above? No simple answer, but may help your decision process about this and other aspects of consultancy?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Evening fornhelper,
When I was contracting to a large multinational ship refitter, I approached the company insurance officer who gave good guidance on reputable and preferred insurers (the one that bears a red fleur de les). The advised cover even with gradiosh competence level was 5M which attracted a monthly premium of £98 (ouch), which was naturally put through the books as an expense.
Regards
Alex
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
FH,
As already stated, it's "horses for courses", i.e. if you are going to be involved in asbestos or construction activities, then expect a hike in your premium.
My cover for both PI & PL is £1 million, with a premium of just under £300 pa.
However, my advice is to choose a provider that you can actually talk to rather than being solely web based (cheaper I know!) & will provide you cover for "one off" contracts which may not be covered by your existing premium.
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
during transit of any equipment what you can do is take insurance protection through any Insurance provider . But safety of the goods and the workers are essential and so to train them or on training manuals visit http://www.redcross.ie/n...alth-and-safety-at-work/ .
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
BEWARE Insurance is becoming an unscrupulous business. So much so the law surrounding material facts is likely to be changed. Read the small print very carefully !
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
BJC says "BEWARE Insurance is becoming an unscrupulous business. "
That's a bit harsh! Insurance is like any other business based on a contract - it all depends upon the small print, the Terms & Conditions etc ... it has always been thus.
And yes, whilst the approach is being reviewed it is to make it a more level playing field - not really to deter shady characters - in my opinion!
Phil
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi Zyggy - did you mean to direct your comment to myself or fornhelper?
BJC - insurance has always been an unscrupulous business in many peoples eyes!
The probable changes that you refer to could well be the attempt to remove the current requirement for you to inform the Insurer of all "relevant information" and for them to retain the ability to then exclude or reduce your claim because you hadn't disclosed some other fact that has little or no relevance to your claim but could be considered as "relevant" if you've got a good enough lawyer [they do!].
The proposed change is to prevent [or at least minimise] this by requiring insurers to provide properly defined questions that you have to answer and thereby reduce the "black hole" effect when the insurer is attempting to reduce or prevent paying out out.
In essence, the common, and perceptively abused, "wider than any horizon" criteria of "in utmost good faith" that is currently the basis on which the insurance is provided is being provided will be curtailed somewhat - we don't know by how much yet as it appears that legislating in this area has fallen off the current Govt agenda after an initially enthusiastic adoption. Can't think why!
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Frank, I was responding to Fornhelper & I started my response with "FH" as this is how he/she signed off at #1 - sorry for any confusion!
Zyggy
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.