Professional Indemnity

Simon Wilcox essuu at
Wed May 2 12:32:06 BST 2012

On 02/05/2012 00:04, Dirk Koopman wrote:
> The problem with PI is that you have to have it when the punter makes 
> the claim, not (just) when you did the work. Which means that if the 
> BBC (just talking very hypothetically) wants to sue three years after 
> you left them, and you have no PI in force, then you could be stuffed.

You can get what the insurance industry calls run-on insurance to cover 
you for claims arising from past work. It's relatively cheap if you're 
no longer contracting.

> I have successfully argued, in a non IR35 threatening way, that the 
> customer has to test and accept the work that I do. Once (s)he has 
> accepted the work, and they sell as theirs, then they must accept 
> liability. 

PI insurance should also cover making non-code related mistakes that 
could be deemed unprofessional. For instance if you accidentally 
breached a confidentiality agreement, resulting in a substantive loss 
for the client you might find that they'll sue you for the loss. PI 
insurance should be there to protect you.

Personally I think it's a waste of money, I don't think I've ever heard 
of a contractor in the software industries we typically work in ever 
being sued for something that PI would protect.


More information about the mailing list