Recommendations for IT contractor (limited company) Insurance

Forums › IT Pro and developers › Recommendations for IT contractor (limited company) Insurance

1 | 2 | 3

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2004424 29-Apr-2018 10:14

I have edited or deleted posts that have either personal attack or used someone as an example.

Please refrain from these. Involved parties received a PM from me.

BlinkyBill

1443 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2004438 29-Apr-2018 10:35

The legal system we have incorporates the concept of precedence and also testing the law in court. The scope of this discussion is the need for an independent IT contractor to obtain Professional Indemnity or Public Liability insurance in New Zealand.

If anyone could cite a case where an independent IT contractor was sued for either accidental or negligent mistake, in New Zealand, then I'm sure that would be informative, and would allow anyone considering the real-world need for such insurances to make a more informed decision.

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2004440 29-Apr-2018 10:37

DDNZ: You are mixing up PL and PI there and giving the appearance that you're not aware of the difference. PL is a non issue. Those policies are only a few hundred bucks so who cares? I'm talking about PI. Lets see some reference to a legal claim defended by an insurance company under a PI policy. It's public court data so you should be able to point to one?

My broker at Crombie Lockwood admitted to me that there have been no claims in NZ on PI policies by IT contractors.

I stand to be corrected, by authoritative cite to court records. Otherwise I don't believe you.

PL on the other hand...

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2004455 29-Apr-2018 11:07

Kryptonjohn, look up this thing called the Arbitration Act. Most corporates litigate their disputes via arbitration when it is worth litigating (more on that later), in which all participants are required by law to keep all details confidential. Every single corporate that I have advised have inserted an arbitration clause into their major contracts with their major contractors. Smaller disputes are handled by settlement and negotiations because going to court isn’t worth it on anything less than 300k. You would know this if you actually understood the legal system.

And as a lawyer I am not prepared nor able (under my proffession’s code of ethics) to discuss my clients’ or affairs to convince some guy on the internet who thinks that his insurance broker knows every bit of litigation in NZ. I can equally demand you put up some evidence to substantiate your hroker’s third hand information. Unlike you, I am speaking from actual knowledge of pursuing IT contractors to the extent of triggering their insurance coverage, at least to the extent that their insurers took over the defence of the claim.

And for the umpteenth time, it is NOT only actual litigation that reaches the courts that someone needs protection from. A one man band contractor especially can not afford to devote all his or her time on non-productive tasks like handling initial allegations of breach of contract/negligence. And I am quite aware of what a PI policy is, thank you. I was responding to BlinkyBill’s claims.

You might know IT and you might even have talked to a broker. But none of that substantiates in any way, shape or form you having any serious or practical knowledge of issues around insurance contracts, IT contracts disputes resolution, or what goes on without the court or arbitration systems. How about you just respect this fact and confine your opinions away from what is a professional area of practice for people who have actual training and skills in it?

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2004461 29-Apr-2018 11:21

I don't need to look at the Arbitration Act and I really wonder why you would even bring it up. Of course I wouldn't expect you to post client confidential information and that's why I asked if you could cite public court information.

So it's never made it to court then.

And where one side sniffs the other has insurance they have a strong intensive to attack them for their liability cover through a settlement. Sounds like a great reason to not have PI.

My observations are based on three decades in this game, and discussions I've had with colleagues and clients in that time. I've dealt with many, many client's lawyers in that time and almost all of them work on a first principals legal basis that is the most conservative and risk averse possible. These people sometimes insist on PI purely to cover their arses. As a lawyer I am not surprised you have taken your stance. It's a bit like asking an insurance salesman if you have enough insurance. You;ll always get the same answer.

IT contractors don't need PI. End of story.

Consulting firms might.

As to: "How about you just respect this fact and confine your opinions away from what is a professional area of practice for people who have actual training and skills in it?"

This is a discussion forum and I'll confine my opinions to whatever the hell I please but thanks for your unsolicited and unsubstantiated advice, appeal-to-authority and all. You need to accept that we all offer "opinions" here not professional advice as you are attempting to do. As a reasonably anonymous discussion forum, appeals to authority carry zero weight with me here, so while your opinions are interesting to me I'll take them as opinions only..

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2004463 29-Apr-2018 11:23

I'm locking this thread because I understand the wealth of information provided can be used now.

1 | 2 | 3