QDOS TLC Insurance

[northernladuk]

Where did the OP say his role was moved inside?

He hasn't give enough information so I've gone for the assumption. The only other option is they've not done a determination and gone for a blanket ban which is also gonna attract attention so either way by staying he goes in to the higher risk catagory

Higher than those who were determined inside, then that determination was "revoked" when the IR35 delay took place in April 2020? I'm sure who you include in "we" here, but I think they need to have a bit of a rethink.

Doesn't really matter. If he has been deemed inside by his client and he's been operating outside then he's exactly what HMRC want. Revoked or whatever doesn't matter. The client has made it clear what the role should have been.

Er, that's what insurance companies do - they price polices based on risk across their portfolio knowing they will have to pay out on the few that make a claim, but not on the vast majority that don't, and they make a profit.

They do... but QDOS don't which is my whole point. I paid the same amount for 10 years (forget general price rises and the like) and work hard to keep my IR35 status safe so somebody shouldn't come in, pay the same amount once to be covered for high risk situations. That's my point.

Are you now suggesting they should only take on customers who they think will never claim? Can you work out what the end-game would be for them if they did that so obviously?

That's a bit of a generalisation. They shouldn't take on customers that are at very high risk of an investigation just for the sake of £250. You said yourself they should price on risk. I'm sure I saw a post somewhere saying QDOS wouldn't insure the GSK people becuase they've been deemed inside and got a letter from HMRC so why should someone in the same boat without a letter from HMRC get insurance for the same price?

This made me laugh. Doing the right thing by loyal paying customers. Its just like when politicians and media use "What about the hard working families". It means nothing.

Sadly this is true, wrong but true. Maybe a bit of wishful thinking.

[Paralytic]

This kinda pisses me off. So.... You were the low hanging fruit at most risk.. you were outside and got moved inside by your client.

Where did the OP say his role was moved inside?

The highest risk catagory exactly the people we thought HMRC would be rubbing their hands with glee at.

Higher than those who were determined inside, then that determination was "revoked" when the IR35 delay took place in April 2020? I'm sure who you include in "we" here, but I think they need to have a bit of a rethink.

<snip "Its not fair" rant based on wrong assumptions>

I also understand the reason QDOS is OK with it is because they know the chance of you getting investigated is slim to nil. It's free money so they won't turn away a free £250 because they know the risk of them having to spend tens of k defending you won't happen.

Er, that's what insurance companies do - they price polices based on risk across their portfolio knowing they will have to pay out on the few that make a claim, but not on the vast majority that don't, and they make a profit.

Are you now suggesting they should only take on customers who they think will never claim? Can you work out what the end-game would be for them if they did that so obviously?

Doing the right thing by loyal paying customers doesn't matter if the risk isn't there.

This made me laugh. Doing the right thing by loyal paying customers. Its just like when politicians and media use "What about the hard working families". It means nothing.

[northernladuk]

QDOS has now given in writing that they will still cover me on TLC35 and represent me even if I do not have Business Insurance. I never understood why they even put that clause for TLC35 when that is tax liability cover from HMRC rather than any claims from client.

This kinda pisses me off. So.... You were the low hanging fruit at most risk.. you were outside and got moved inside by your client. The highest risk catagory exactly the people we thought HMRC would be rubbing their hands with glee at. It's possible the client got it wrong but lets say they haven't. They've held their hands up and said they want to control you, they wouldn't take RoS and MoO is present so they've put you inside where you should have been all along.
QDOS say you pay your £250 and they will cover you for this? That's appalling. If you got caught the case would cost QDOS tens of thousands from other people's payments where you've paid just £250 and are in the highest risk catagory. Why have I been paying for 10+ years and not needed them because I've done things properly yet they'll use all that money I've paid in to cover someone who should be inside and should be caught?

That's just not right.... You were incorrectly outside, customer has admitted that, QDOS should want nothing to do with this for obvious reasons. What other insurance in the world is there where you can commit the offense and then get insurance for it afterwards? at the same rate as everyone else that's done everything right?

QDOS won't cover policies that were checked and failed so why will they cover yours without even seeing the contract? Just madness.

All that said, I also understand the reason QDOS is OK with it is because they know the chance of you getting investigated is slim to nil. It's free money so they won't turn away a free £250 because they know the risk of them having to spend tens of k defending you won't happen. Doing the right thing by loyal paying customers doesn't matter if the risk isn't there.

The fact they've got the clause about the business insurance is probably kind of what I'm saying. You've not given QDOS a penny and now you expect full legal coverage for just 250 quid.

[soln]

OK, but it is highly unlikely you will get a tax bill, given the level of reperesentation both IPSE and QDOS will represent if it goes to tribunal, so I don't really see TLC35 (or Survive35) as being necessary. It's your call at the end of the day



Don't really know since I don't use them. Others have covered the costs of their membership through some fairly routine purchases.


No, they haven't. Any PI claim is against you personally (to be precise against your professional competence) so QDOS won't be interested. The whole point of the cover is to defend the claim and pay out if you lose, and that's where it stops.

This is assuring. I might proceed with QDOS Tax Enquiry Insurance which is half of TLC35 Cover which only covers tax liability arising if I am caught out as inside IR35.

My last statement was not clear. I was referring to any tax liability from HMRC rather than from my client which is unlikely given I am still working for them via umbrella. I know it was not a good option but there were limited options in April and I felt it is better to earn something and spend on insurance rather than stay on bench which some of my colleagues did.

QDOS has now given in writing that they will still cover me on TLC35 and represent me even if I do not have Business Insurance. I never understood why they even put that clause for TLC35 when that is tax liability cover from HMRC rather than any claims from client.

[malvolio]

My company is still open but have no active clients at the moment. The current business insurance cover runs out next month.

QDOS TLC was an attractive option as there was some liability cover whereas IPSE is purely representation at same cost. It is a different matter whether QDOS will pay out or renege with some excuse given number of conditions they are attaching at purchase.

OK, but it is highly unlikely you will get a tax bill, given the level of reperesentation both IPSE and QDOS will represent if it goes to tribunal, so I don't really see TLC35 (or Survive35) as being necessary. It's your call at the end of the day

The shopping discounts may be useful but without knowing what they are it is difficult to judge.

Don't really know since I don't use them. Others have covered the costs of their membership through some fairly routine purchases.

With Liability Cover, I thought it might be in QDOS’s interest to fight rather than payout the claim as they have skin in the game.

No, they haven't. Any PI claim is against you personally (to be precise against your professional competence) so QDOS won't be interested. The whole point of the cover is to defend the claim and pay out if you lose, and that's where it stops.

[soln]

You don't need IPSE+, basic cover gives you representation for IR35. Be a bit smart witht he discount shopping and it won't cost much anyway. OR any tax-related investigation, come to that...

That said, if your company is closed, it's unlikely you will get investigated anyway - HMRC won't let you close it until they're happy there are no outstanding issues.

PI, however, can come back to bite years down the line. It's not retrospective, but starts when someone makes a claim against you. Depending on what you do, you might want to hang on to it for a while.

My company is still open but have no active clients at the moment. The current business insurance cover runs out next month.

QDOS TLC was an attractive option as there was some liability cover whereas IPSE is purely representation at same cost. It is a different matter whether QDOS will pay out or renege with some excuse given number of conditions they are attaching at purchase.

The shopping discounts may be useful but without knowing what they are it is difficult to judge.

With Liability Cover, I thought it might be in QDOS’s interest to fight rather than payout the claim as they have skin in the game.

[ladymuck]

You don't need IPSE+, basic cover gives you representation for IR35. Be a bit smart witht he discount shopping and it won't cost much anyway. OR any tax-related investigation, come to that...

That said, if your company is closed, it's unlikely you will get investigated anyway - HMRC won't let you close it until they're happy there are no outstanding issues.

PI, however, can come back to bite years down the line. It's not retrospective, but starts when someone makes a claim against you. Depending on what you do, you might want to hang on to it for a while.

The company isn't closed yet. The OP wants insurance in case HMRC open an investigation instead of giving permission to close.

[malvolio]

You don't need IPSE+, basic cover gives you representation for IR35. Be a bit smart witht he discount shopping and it won't cost much anyway. OR any tax-related investigation, come to that...

That said, if your company is closed, it's unlikely you will get investigated anyway - HMRC won't let you close it until they're happy there are no outstanding issues.

PI, however, can come back to bite years down the line. It's not retrospective, but starts when someone makes a claim against you. Depending on what you do, you might want to hang on to it for a while.

[soln]

you want to buy insurance now, to protect you from investigations relating to a contract that ended in April?
Read the small print.

How long was the contract anyway? Are we talking years?
IPSE+ might be a better bet as their cover is based on membership rather than a specific insurance policy.

EDIT: If TLC covers old contracts as you say then use that. But do read the small print.

I spoke to an agent Sushil over the phone and it is all clear about coverage of retrospective contracts as most would be in similar situation as mine who want to cover retrospective activity when shutting down the company.

I should have had this insurance for a while but didn’t.

My query is mainly around holding Business Insurance which I do not need but QDOS is asking me to have when I buy insurance online.

[Lance]

you want to buy insurance now, to protect you from investigations relating to a contract that ended in April?
Read the small print.

How long was the contract anyway? Are we talking years?
IPSE+ might be a better bet as their cover is based on membership rather than a specific insurance policy.

EDIT: If TLC covers old contracts as you say then use that. But do read the small print.

[soln]

QDOS TLC includes Tax Liability cover which starts at £25K and covers all Tax related enquiries including professional representation. It will cover retrospective contracts and also current.

As I no longer use my Ltd Company I only need for retrospective contracts.

In this forum, people recommend either QDOS or IPSE. IPSE is good but not sure if the plus membership is worth for some one purely looking at tax investigation cover.

[ladymuck]

I think Qdos TLC is more for upcoming rather than historic contracts (could be wrong).

Are you looking for an insurance that will cover the costs of having a professional handle a case only, or do you want a policy that will also cover any charges HMRC may impose in case you're found in the wrong?

Make sure you know what policy you want to buy, based on what risk you think you have, and don't go thinking there's only a couple of providers of this kind of insurance.

[soln]

As my client stopped using Ltd Co from April 2020, I had to take up a PAYE contract through the Agency and from August I am using Umbrella Company.

I had kept my Ltd Co open in the hope that there might be further delay in IR35 reform or I could find some work which accepts Ltd Co.

Given that none of them seems likely I will be looking to close my Company but want to have some kind of insurance in case HMRC starts investigation when I request closure of Company.

I was looking at QDOS as an option given Larsen Howie has now merged with Kingsbridge.

However QDOS requires me to not only accept the Right of Substitution exercise clause but also to purchase Business Insurance like PI/EL/PL which I still have but will not renew when that expires.

The agent I called today said that they can still offer me insurance but not sure if this is a trap.