IPSE vs QDOS

[TheFaQQer]

IPSE will cover you for any tax investigation that you might face, but won't automatically cover you for penalties and tax if you lose. You can buy that as an additional extra from Abbey Tax who provide IPSE's investigation service.

Just for added clarity - AbbeyTax cover starts at £329 a year based on the contract value. But, you need to have had that contract reviewed by them and passed first - that's an extra £249 per contract (discounted to £185 for IPSE members), plus £65 for any extensions.

If you think that you might lose, or want peace of mind, pay Qdos the £400 a year to get covered for it.

[unixman]

Thanks FaQQer. That sort of makes sense, and in another way, doesn't. Say I make a programming mistake at my current client. The bug lies dormant for 3 years, then suddenly causes loads of damage in 2018. Meanwhile I have long since moved on to other clients. I would expect/hope to handle any liability claim through the insurance policy in force at the time, when the mistake was made. It doesn't really make sense that my insurance policies circa 2018 should handle it, they are irrelevant I would have thought.

So yes, I understand that the individual is insured not the contract, but... I am sure you see what I mean. Yes I know the example is not IR35.

[dty]

Just for added clarity - AbbeyTax cover starts at £329 a year based on the contract value. But, you need to have had that contract reviewed by them and passed first - that's an extra £249 per contract (discounted to £185 for IPSE members), plus £65 for any extensions.

If you think that you might lose, or want peace of mind, pay Qdos the £400 a year to get covered for it.

TLC35 is £360pa for £50,000 of cover and includes (from memory) unlimited contract reviews. Not sure why anyone would buy the AbbeyTax product. That's part of the reason I went the way I did. The other reason was that I found it very difficult to get any information on the AbbeyTax product - including the price.

[dty]

Thanks FaQQer. That sort of makes sense, and in another way, doesn't. Say I make a programming mistake at my current client. The bug lies dormant for 3 years, then suddenly causes loads of damage in 2018. Meanwhile I have long since moved on to other clients. I would expect/hope to handle any liability claim through the insurance policy in force at the time, when the mistake was made. It doesn't really make sense that my insurance policies circa 2018 should handle it, they are irrelevant I would have thought.

So yes, I understand that the individual is insured not the contract, but... I am sure you see what I mean. Yes I know the example is not IR35.

TLC35 is a "claims made" policy - meaning you claim on the policy you have in force at the time of the claim, not the time the work was done.

You can add past work cover to the QDOS Professional Indemnity policy for c. £30pa.

[dty]

Don't quite follow the logic here. If you're not a member when the case starts, IPSE will not be obliged to provide their cover. If you are a member, why bother with QDOS at all and use the Abbey policy instead?

And if QDOS is significantly cheaper -I have no idea if they are, never having looked at either, but which is the only sensible reason for having both - then ask yourself what they are not doing that Abbey are and does it need to be done...

As stated, I am an IPSE+ member. And I have a QDOS policy.

The QDOS policy is considerably cheaper when you consider that it includes contract reviews which seem very expensive with AbbeyTax.

[jamesbrown]

Supporting an organisation that doesn't align with your views because it's 'good value' is pretty short sighted and so obviously so that I wonder why the OP needs to ask the question at all.

There's some truth in that. OTOH, time permitting, you're more likely to change it from the inside. The limit of my personal involvement is voting in the CC, so I'm probably more in the shortsighted camp, i.e. I view membership as a commercial decision more than a political one, although I probably agree with more of what they do than disagree

[dty]

There's some truth in that. OTOH, time permitting, you're more likely to change it from the inside. The limit of my personal involvement is voting in the CC, so I'm probably more in the shortsighted camp, i.e. I view membership as a commercial decision more than a political one, although I probably agree with more of what they do than disagree

How's the view from that there fence?

I agree with everything you said from "i.e." onwards...

[unixman]

TLC35 is a "claims made" policy - meaning you claim on the policy you have in force at the time of the claim, not the time the work was done.

You can add past work cover to the QDOS Professional Indemnity policy for c. £30pa.

So if I take out TLC35 today, and next week HMRC say thay want to investigate some contract I did in 2012, , even though I did not have TLC35 in 2012, it will still work ? Good news if true, sort of the converse if my example above.

[malvolio]

As stated, I am an IPSE+ member. And I have a QDOS policy.

The QDOS policy is considerably cheaper when you consider that it includes contract reviews which seem very expensive with AbbeyTax.

And as I said, what is on doing that the other isn't? Abbey review the whole contract , for example, not just the areas that impact IR35, which may have a bearing. You have to compare like for like; I was once offered a PI policy that excluded personal errors... It was nice and cheap though.

Agreed Abbey's details used to be rather hard to track down; I think they're a bit clearer now.

[dty]

So if I take out TLC35 today, and next week HMRC say thay want to investigate some contract I did in 2012, , even though I did not have TLC35 in 2012, it will still work ? Good news if true, sort of the converse if my example above.

Yes.