QDOS - TLC35 liability cover endorsement - makes cover worthless.

[northernladuk]

Very concerning that QDOS aren’t providing a consistent and clear position here! Let’s hope they clear that up, and the answers to the original questions in this thread very soon...

Why don't you ring them and ask and then come back and tell us the answer? You can't blame them for not camping in a contractor forum looking for one thread to reply to.

[aligning2020]

Why don't you ring them and ask and then come back and tell us the answer? You can't blame them for not camping in a contractor forum looking for one thread to reply to.

Here he is...as predictable as day follows night. No camping required, it’s really not the weather for it. However any business worth its salt will be undertaking due diligence on social media etc to ensure the correct facts are out there for all to see. Probably via the google search facility you are so fond of highlighting. While individuals views on experiences and conversations they have had are great thread openers, they remain just that, views. How brilliant is it that we actually have an official QDOS presence contributing here who can conclusively put this sort of thing to bed for the thousands of contractors who no doubt read it?

So the question remains, QDOS, can you please provide the position on the original questions I posed in this thread?

Thanks

[northernladuk]

However any business worth its salt will be undertaking due diligence on social media etc to ensure the correct facts are out there for all to see.

Demanding a response from a business at the weekend isnt the smartest thing to do is it.

So the question remains, QDOS, can you please provide the position on the original questions I posed in this thread?

Thanks

Now it's the first working day since you posted I'm sure you'll get one..

Why not drop them a PM to nudge them in to an answer and help us all?

[LetterBox]

Here he is...as predictable as day follows night. No camping required, it’s really not the weather for it. However any business worth its salt will be undertaking due diligence on social media etc to ensure the correct facts are out there for all to see. Probably via the google search facility you are so fond of highlighting. While individuals views on experiences and conversations they have had are great thread openers, they remain just that, views. How brilliant is it that we actually have an official QDOS presence contributing here who can conclusively put this sort of thing to bed for the thousands of contractors who no doubt read it?

So the question remains, QDOS, can you please provide the position on the original questions I posed in this thread?

Thanks

It's all pretty straightforward, if QDOS need to step in then it'll be done on a case by case basis, understanding that they will want a high chance of winning.

Points such as

• The policyholder is able to exercise a Right of Substitution.
• The policyholder has autonomy over their method of work and is not subject to the same level of supervision or control as their clients’ employees.

Does the sub question mean you need to be able to make a sub with agreement of client or make a sub and your business has the final say?
And "same level", in what area? and how different does the autonomy and method need to be?

These are judgement calls made by QDOS assessors based on the strength of the whole case. I see no reason for them to give you absolutes and would not expect them to do so.

[aligning2020]

Demanding a response from a business at the weekend isnt the smartest thing to do is it.

Now it's the first working day since you posted I'm sure you'll get one..

Why not drop them a PM to nudge them in to an answer and help us all?

If you’ve actually bothered to read what I’ve written then you’ll clearly see that I’m not demanding a response over the weekend. In fact I’ve explicitly acknowledged it is the weekend!

It’s far from straight forwards, if it was there wouldn’t be any discussion on it. The summary question is however straight forwards though - QDOS, please confirm the point in time that the working practices have to be agreed in order to indemnify sections 8 and 9? I.e. is it after a claim has been made and during an ir35 case OR is it as part of a working practices review undertaken by QDOS and prior to any claim ever being made?

[northernladuk]

There is the added problem Sebs' yaght might be out of WiFi range as well don't forget.

[ladymuck]

There is the added problem Sebs' yaght might be out of WiFi range as well don't forget.

:

Yacht

[LetterBox]

If you’ve actually bothered to read what I’ve written then you’ll clearly see that I’m not demanding a response over the weekend. In fact I’ve explicitly acknowledged it is the weekend!

It’s far from straight forwards, if it was there wouldn’t be any discussion on it. The summary question is however straight forwards though - QDOS, please confirm the point in time that the working practices have to be agreed in order to indemnify sections 8 and 9? I.e. is it after a claim has been made and during an ir35 case OR is it as part of a working practices review undertaken by QDOS and prior to any claim ever being made?

Both. WP will be noted when you start paying premiums, they'll be heavily reviewed again if a claim is made.

Insurance innit.

[BrilloPad]

There is the added problem Sebs' yaght might be out of WiFi range as well don't forget.

Or maybe he has twigged that CUK is full of moaning idiots and he would rather not have their business anyway?

[aligning2020]

Both. WP will be noted when you start paying premiums, they'll be heavily reviewed again if a claim is made.

Insurance innit.

Let’s wait for QDOS to confirm. If the answer is as you suggest then from what I can see, there is literally no point in paying for the cover. Any case that hmrc win will almost certainly include one of the clauses in the endorsement proven not to have been in place.