PCG and QDOS IR35 coverage

[captainham]

Both the PCG and QDOS don't expect to lose.

They just have different marketing to cover the same thing.

After all why would you cover some ones penalties and back taxes which could run into a hell of a lot of money if you think you are likely to lose the case?

It's not the same thing at all; one covers penalties/back taxes, the other does not. Both cover initial investigation.

Of course neither of them plan to lose a case, but the point is that nothing is certain...so in the (hopefully unlikely) event that you do lose, you are better off with Qdos (or AbbeyTax, etc etc) as opposed to PCG.

[Fandango]

Yes, all previous contracts are covered providing they were all done through the same limited company.

Thats great! thanks for the reply!

Looks like you've got a new customer heading your way

[psychocandy]

I'm actually the opposite on this. As QDOS covers everything (enquiries+taxes/penalties, etc), whereas PCG only covers the investigation part, I'd rather be covered for the whole lot rather than just part...

Exactly. But PCG membership is cheaper than paying for TLC35 if you just want investigation covered.

[psychocandy]

So am i correct in thinking that QDOS TLC35 will cover all previous contracts as well? (presuming you meet their criteria in the questionairre you mentioned?)

I've been looking through their website & the policy documentation but i'm not totally clear (i plan to call them anyway but thought i'd ask incase anyone knew already)

The website says

My understanding is that QDOS is on a claims made basis. i.e. If you're covered you can claim for anything that arises during the coverage period even if its from before.

[psychocandy]

Both the PCG and QDOS don't expect to lose.

They just have different marketing to cover the same thing.

After all why would you cover some ones penalties and back taxes which could run into a hell of a lot of money if you think you are likely to lose the case?

True. But I guess they take into account the risks involved that one day they might have to cough up £50K or so.

[captainham]

Exactly. But PCG membership is cheaper than paying for TLC35 if you just want investigation covered.

Indeed you are quite right, but my innate paranoia fears becoming the 9th victim out of 1,458 (or whatever the PCG stats are on success rates) who will fail and get shafted by HMRC, so for the sake of a couple of hundred quid extra a year, I'll be opting for the one that gives me maximum peace of mind.

And yes I appreciate the ones that have failed with PCG were probably so far inside IR35 that it's untrue, whereas I genuinely believe I myself am outside, but then when did a little thing like rationality/common sense ever get in the way of a good HMRC investigation!

[psychocandy]

It's not the same thing at all; one covers penalties/back taxes, the other does not. Both cover initial investigation.

Of course neither of them plan to lose a case, but the point is that nothing is certain...so in the (hopefully unlikely) event that you do lose, you are better off with Qdos (or AbbeyTax, etc etc) as opposed to PCG.

You're right PCG only covers investigation but I'm taking about the extra bit you can pay with Abbey Tax which works in conjunction with PCG so that you are covered for penalties.

PCG membership - £120 - covers you for investigation
PCG plus (bit extra) - £220

QDOS - £360 - covers investigation plus penalties. BUT you've got to got through them in the first instance.

Abbey Tax add-on to PCG plus - depends on contract value etc. - covers penalties etc if PCG lose case for you.

Also, read thread to see how QDOS and Abbey policies differ in how they are applied etc. QDOS is a yearly payment, Abbey is per contract.

[snappy]

According to the Conditions of Cover for TLC35:

The insurer will give consent in writing or by telephone provided that
there are reasonable grounds for representation of the policyholder and
provided that the insurer is satisfied that there are reasonable prospects
of the policyholder achieving a satisfactory outcome in the enquiry or
dispute and that it is reasonable to incur professional fees.

Reasonable prospects of the policyholder achieving a satisfactory
outcome exist if:
a. The policyholder has a reasonable prospect of either pursuing or
defending a claim.
b. The appointed consultant would advise a paying party of moderate
financial means to proceed with the claim.
c. The benefits likely to be obtained by proceeding with the claim
justify the likely costs.
d. The appointed consultant considers it reasonable in all circumstances that the claim should proceed.

Does that mean that, even if you accurately confirm the TLC35 statements that you are asked to confirm on purchase of the policy (in your own opinion, as some of the questions are subjective), that they won't cover either investigation or tax/interest/etc. if, in their opinion, they won't win, i.e. there'll be no payout anyway?

Will PCG Plus (I have this) provide cover until conclusion, i.e. until you win or lose?

In my opinion, I can confirm all of the TLC35 statements, but it seems to me that the Ts & Cs in the policy wording means that if there's a chance they'll have to pay out, they won't cover you.

Any opinions? Many thanks.

[psychocandy]

According to the Conditions of Cover for TLC35:



Does that mean that, even if you accurately confirm the TLC35 statements that you are asked to confirm on purchase of the policy (in your own opinion, as some of the questions are subjective), that they won't cover either investigation or tax/interest/etc. if, in their opinion, they won't win, i.e. there'll be no payout anyway?

Will PCG Plus (I have this) provide cover until conclusion, i.e. until you win or lose?

In my opinion, I can confirm all of the TLC35 statements, but it seems to me that the Ts & Cs in the policy wording means that if there's a chance they'll have to pay out, they won't cover you.

Any opinions? Many thanks.

Snappy. Hmm. Good point.

Seems to contradict themselves here. After all, if they don't think they're going to win they can choose not to represent you so, in theory, they could choose to only represent you when it suits.

Two problems I can see:-

1. What's the point in having even having representation insurance if said insurer can decide to leave you high and dry if it suits them? Its like having car insurance, having an accident and then insurer saying, nah, too expensive.

2. If they can choose to represent you or not, surely this means they will avoid cases they might lose? I.e. Will never ever have to payout anyway!!!!

Think QDOS representative on here might need to answer this one.

I'm beginning to wonder if just sticking with PCG is the best answer. Not convinced IR35 tax/fines insurance is all its cracked up to be to be honest.

[psychocandy]

Interesting...

Over-egging the risks of IR35? | PCG