insurance policy

[bobbuilder]

Hello all,

I was wondering if there are any legal beagles who can offer me some advice. I did a rather large building job for a client, but she is claiming the work has not been done to a reasonable standard. She is quoting the consumer rights act to me. Having read about this, it would appear the consumer rights act is a statutory law that anyone who buys something is entitled to be protected by it.

Having looked on my PI insurance policy, it defines costs and expenses as:


Costs and Expenses

(a) Fees for Your legal representation at:

(i) any Coroner's Inquest or Fatal Accident Inquiry
(ii) proceedings in any Court of Summary Jurisdiction arising out of any alleged breach of statutory duty.

It then goes onto to state:

The Cover

We will pay You:

(a) up to the Limit of Indemnity for Your legal liability to pay Compensation and

(b) for Your legal liability to pay Costs and Expenses
in respect of accidental:

(i) Personal Injury
(ii) Damage to Property
(iii) obstruction trespass nuisance or interference with any right of way air light or water
which arises in connection with the Business and which happens within the Territorial Limits during the Period of Insurance.



So can anyone help me better understand this wording. It would appear that I am covered for any claims made against me under statutory law such as the consumer rights act, but it will only cover me for accidental damage. But this is confusing, as my understanding is that statutory liability cannot be minimised through a contract (in this case my insurance policy) and therefore the policy cannot state it is only for accidental breaches of statutory duty.- or am I missing something?

However if this is correct, I guess it would make sense, in that any damage done, has to have been accidental, because if it was not accidental it would be intentional, which would make it a crime would it not?!

Any help would be much appreciated.

[des8]

Hi and welcome

Could you please clarify if you are quoting from a PUBLIC LIABILITY (PL) policy or a PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY (PI) policy?

Your post refers to a PI policy but seems more like a PL policy

[bobbuilder]

Hi and welcome

Could you please clarify if you are quoting from a PUBLIC LIABILITY (PL) policy or a PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY (PI) policy?

Your post refers to a PI policy but seems more like a PL policy

sorry my mistake, it is part of my insurance policy that contains the Public liability (PL) section.

[des8]

Ok then, but sorry to tell you your public liability section does not cover you against claims for unsatisfactory workmanship, which should be covered by professional indemnity insurance

You correctly indicated what your PL policy covers against ie accidental damages to property.
PI policy covers you for any claim that relates to a breach of professional duty in the conduct of your professional business

[bobbuilder]

Ok then, but sorry to tell you your public liability section does not cover you against claims for unsatisfactory workmanship, which should be covered by professional indemnity insurance

You correctly indicated what your PL policy covers against ie accidental damages to property.
PI policy covers you for any claim that relates to a breach of professional duty in the conduct of your professional business

yeah that's what I thought, but having read the policy it appears to say differently. It specifically talks about statutory breaches, which is what appears to be my case. I know that if it was the other way round, the insurer would pounce on any word to get out of paying!

[des8]

I'm afraid it is a case of a technical contract (the policy) not being read correctly by the policyholder (you).

You did not purchase cover to protect yourself against claims for substandard work.
It doesn't matter whether your work is substandard or not, there is always the risk of an unhappy customer making a claim
As a business man this is a risk which you did not insure.
IMO it is unfair to suggest the insurers are being unfair.

On a more practical approach do you require assistance disputing this claim, which at this stage appears not to have reached court?
If so please post up more details.

[bobbuilder]

I'm afraid it is a case of a technical contract (the policy) not being read correctly by the policyholder (you).

You did not purchase cover to protect yourself against claims for substandard work.
It doesn't matter whether your work is substandard or not, there is always the risk of an unhappy customer making a claim
As a business man this is a risk which you did not insure.
IMO it is unfair to suggest the insurers are being unfair.

On a more practical approach do you require assistance disputing this claim, which at this stage appears not to have reached court?
If so please post up more details.

So may I ask under what circumstances would such insurance be used? What breaches of statuary law is it referring to? I'm not saying you are wrong at all- I am just trying to better understand the policy!

[des8]

To what insurance are you referring, PI or PL?

Public liability insurance protects the policyholder against claims of personal injury or property damage that a third party suffers (or claims to have suffered) as a result of your business activities.
Professional Indemnity insurance protects you in the event that your business is sued by a client.unhappy with the work you've produced . Even if you haven't made a mistake, you may still have to fight a claim and this form of insurance will help to settle disputes and cover the cost of your legal defence..

The Public Liability insurers are also including your defence costs if you are prosecuted in a court of summary jurisdiction for an alleged breach of statutory duty , (ie duties imposed by statute or regulations)
The Consumer Rights Act does not impose any statutory duties on the trader but grants rights to the consumer in the event they allege unsatisfactory etc work by the trader.