Insurance renewal

[Clippy]

My (QDos) insurances (PI & PL) are due for renewal in the next week.

I'm currently out of contract and am thinking there is no need to renew until I secure a new contract.

Thought I would check to make sure there isn't any reason(s) unbeknown to me that I should renew. For example, there is no requirement to keep continuous cover between contracts, is there?

[The Wikir Man]

If you are sued by a previous customer, then you would need to have insurance in place to handle that.

It's worth keeping for a few years even, IMHO.

[Clippy]

If you are sued by a previous customer, then you would need to have insurance in place to handle that.

It's worth keeping for a few years even, IMHO.

That was going to be another question I was going to ask separately.

Is this true as this approach seems to suggest you need to stay with the same insurance provider ad infinitum in case you get sued for a historic contract.

I would have thought if you are sued for a historic contract then you would need to speak to the insurance provider who covered you at the time of that contract.

[Wanderer]

The chances of your company getting sued are minimal. Look at how much you pay for the insurance vs the amount covered.

If you get sued for some act which occurred (say) 5 years ago then the insurer providing coverage at that time would have to deal with it, not your current insurer.

I don't accept this nonsense about needing insurance for years after ceasing trading. Once your company stops trading, they can sue it all they like but they won't get anything.

Remember that it's the company that is covered by the insurance, NOT you personally and the company has limited liability

I wouldn't have insurance at all unless the agent/client demanded it.

[blacjac]

If you are sued by a previous customer, then you would need to have insurance in place to handle that.

It's worth keeping for a few years even, IMHO.

That was going to be another question I was going to ask separately.

Is this true as this approach seems to suggest you need to stay with the same insurance provider ad infinitum in case you get sued for a historic contract.

I would have thought if you are sued for a historic contract then you would need to speak to the insurance provider who covered you at the time of that contract.

Bingo!
I know that when I took out my PI insurance they made it very clear to me that I would need to keep the insurance going to be covered for past work, and they would only cover work done whilst insured by them.

So, if a client poped up from 3 years ago and tried to sue, I would not be covered if I had switched insurers or not kept up insurance, even if I was insured at the time the work was done.

I.e., you have to have insurance at the time the work was done, the time the claim is made and all the time in between.

Wether or not they can actually enforce this I have no idea, only a judge would be able to say that. I suppose that if the time between the work being done and the claim being filed was a long time you could probably argue that if the work was sub standard they should have claimed a lot sooner.

[blacjac]

If you get sued for some act which occurred (say) 5 years ago then the insurer providing coverage at that time would have to deal with it, not your current insurer.

What if the insurer from 5 years ago no longer exists? Even if they did, why would the entertain an ex client trying to get money out of them 5 years after they stopped being a client. Good luck with that.

I don't accept this nonsense about needing insurance for years after ceasing trading. Once your company stops trading, they can sue it all they like but they won't get anything.

It's not about keeping the insurance going after the company has ceased trading, it's about keeping the insurance going after the company has stopped doing work for the client in question but is now trading with other clients.


Do you really think if one of your ex clients tried to sue you and the company was closed down then that would be the end of it?
Like hell it would, as a company director you are responsible for running the company, and not being insured for the work you are doing could amount to neglegence and leave you personally liable.


However this all depends on how good your clients lawyers are and how good the lawyer you can afford is. Depends on how much of a gambler you are.....

[malvolio]

Jeez. It's a few hundred pounds a year at most, you're running a business, it's a standard business overhead. YourCo doesn't suddenly run out of funds if you are out of contract: or if it does, you're not doing it right.

Either keep it going properly or don't have it at all. It doesn't work if you don't maintain it - which is something to do with the nature of the risk - so it's a binary choice.

[Hex]

PI is always (as far as I know) underwritten on a "Date Claims Made" basis which means that you need insurance in place when the claim is made, not when you did the work.

So if you don't renew now and a past company tries to sue your limited then you don't have insurance.

It's up to you how much of a risk you think this is and how much impact it would have if it did happen.

[Clippy]

PI is always (as far as I know) underwritten on a "Date Claims Made" basis which means that you need insurance in place when the claim is made, not when you did the work.

So if you don't renew now and a past company tries to sue your limited then you don't have insurance.

It's up to you how much of a risk you think this is and how much impact it would have if it did happen.

Again, this suggests you have to stay with the same insurance provider. Correct?

[Hex]

It shouldn't do. Any new insurer should insure you for claims made during the period of their policy that are made on contracts completed before their policy started.

That's the point of "Date Claims Made" it is based on the date of the claim not the time the loss actually occurred.

Best to check with your insurer or potential insurer though to be sure.