Originally posted by zeitghost
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: Liability
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Liability"
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by SueEllen View PostIf you have PI then the client has to fight with your company's insurers for the money. If you don't the fight is with you so depending on the lawyers they hire they can make your life hell.
Just go and buy some insurance for £100 and don't worry about it.
Leave a comment:
-
If you have PI then the client has to fight with your company's insurers for the money. If you don't the fight is with you so depending on the lawyers they hire they can make your life hell.
Just go and buy some insurance for £100 and don't worry about it.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by malvolio View PostLesson for the future then. If you work in an area where you can be blamed as the sole arbiter of what is produced, you need insurance for when it goes wrong. As I said somewhere else recently, "Fingers crossed" is not a good business model.
Leave a comment:
-
...
Originally posted by louie View PostIt's really just a worry of mine, I doubt it will not do what it's suppose to and I doubt if it doesn't they will hold me solely responsible. But I wanted to make sure.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by tractor View PostWell 'intended' is very nebulous and would be difficult to prove negligence in that respect whilst 'specified' is entirely the opposite. If there was no specification, intention can be very difficult to prove regardless of insurance or the lack of. However, if they have deep pockets or are better at brinkmanship than you..........
Whatever you do, don't agree to 'put it right' either for free or without a watertight spec. I'd be of the mind to just walk away regardless, if they are already showing displeasure, the likelihood is that even if you agree to extend and do 'put it right', payment may well not be forthcoming.
Leave a comment:
-
....
Originally posted by louie View PostNo it will probably work, but based on extreme lack of a spec especially around what was to be audited (so I just audited every thing), there bound to be something missing from the system as a whole therefore not being audited.
Whatever you do, don't agree to 'put it right' either for free or without a watertight spec. I'd be of the mind to just walk away regardless, if they are already showing displeasure, the likelihood is that even if you agree to extend and do 'put it right', payment may well not be forthcoming.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by tractor View PostWho actually told you? Was it the client or was it some barrack room lawyer at the pub? If it was the client, it makes a difference whether it was one of those hypothetical type conversations or not.
Have they actually complained to you that the system is not working as they intended?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by louie View PostI worked on a system that had almost no requirements and no test team, and an insane deadline due a law coming into existence. However now the system is live I am told that the users can sue my client if the system doesn't audit certain data. I got the impression they were implying I would be held responsible? Is that possible. I did my best based on the fragments of information i had.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by louie View PostI don't have the insurance, but given I wasn't given the correct information and support (testers) etc I don't see how they could ever hold be fully responsible.
Leave a comment:
-
....
Originally posted by eek View PostThinking about it I think the issue really boils down to the fact the end client wants someone to fix the problem for free and the old clientco want Louie to do it.
The threats are there because they want it done for free so just calmly call them back and point out it that while you would be happy to help its a change request that you will happily quote and charge for. You can also do it quickly if you can work from home (which would allow you to do it in your own time or offload it to elance and pocket the difference).
Leave a comment:
-
...
Originally posted by louie View PostI worked on a system that had almost no requirements and no test team, and an insane deadline due a law coming into existence. However now the system is live I am told that the users can sue my client if the system doesn't audit certain data. I got the impression they were implying I would be held responsible? Is that possible. I did my best based on the fragments of information i had.
Have they actually complained to you that the system is not working as they intended?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by eek View PostActually I think that makes it more likely rather than less likely. The fact that you did it all by yourself without support means that they can point out the obvious target (the lone developer) and helps them clearly deflect the blame from them to you.
Also the lack of analysis doesn't help your argument unless you can accurately show that the initial information you got was confirmed as correct by the third party. If you were working agilely with continuing changing requirements they could easily used your defence against you.
The killer thing here is that Lawyers will destroy you with both time and money so I view indemnity insurance as both something my clients like and something that when things go wrong allows me to offload the problem to a specialist asap.
Assuming all your contract paperwork is in your company name your best option is probably to close you current company down asap and start your next contract as a new company. Oh and find some indemnity insurance for your next contract its very cheap if you end up needing it.
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: