Prof indem insurance versus public liabillity

It's all in the contract, but run-off cover may be advisable.

Public liability is less likely to be manifest after the event, so if a plumber trips over your equipment and suffers an injury, this insurance would cover you. Self evidently, once you have left the site, you are not going to cause any further harm to anybody else.

Professional indemnity cover is for giving professional advice or an opinion, so design and EICR. Clearly, design errors or the consequences of a drive-by EICR may not be evident immediately.

The Limitation Act 1980 gives a claimant 6 years from the date of damage occurring to put in a claim so run-off cover would normally be maintained for that period.

The longer time has elapsed since the work was done, the more difficult it will be to prove causation.

Chris Pearson said:

It's all in the contract,

Only a Court can decide that ...

Or in cases where the wrong was not immediately obvious, limitation clock starts ticking only from the date the victim becomes (or may reasonably be assumed to have become ) aware of it, the example the text books use  is for medical malpractice, where it is not until a patient shows symptoms and goes to a second doctor, and they are told for example that their previous surgery was botched do they have a cause for legal action.

In the language of the legals the 'cause of action does not accrue' until both

1) the defective work has been done, and

2) It has been discovered and reported to the victim.

So the poor EICR may not be found until the next one, and then there are 6 years to go after whoever did the first one. But in practice, without some other accident or injury occurring , there would be no point.

The Speedy, Bodge, Leggit and Scarper are quite safe unless their negligence actually does real damage.

Mike

Or in cases where the wrong was not immediately obvious, limitation clock starts ticking only from the date the victim becomes (or may reasonably be assumed to have become ) aware of it, the example the text books use  is for medical malpractice, where it is not until a patient shows symptoms and goes to a second doctor, and they are told for example that their previous surgery was botched do they have a cause for legal action.

In the language of the legals the 'cause of action does not accrue' until both

1) the defective work has been done, and

2) It has been discovered and reported to the victim.

So the poor EICR may not be found until the next one, and then there are 6 years to go after whoever did the first one. But in practice, without some other accident or injury occurring , there would be no point.

The Speedy, Bodge, Leggit and Scarper are quite safe unless their negligence actually does real damage.

Mike

I am not sure that is quite correct. Personal injury (including clinical negligence) is treated differently from other causes of action.

What isn't entirely clear to me is that if an inadequately tightened terminal does not cause a fire for say 10 years, whether the cause of action is the inadequate workmanship or the fire. I think the former, but in any event whilst the fact that a terminal has been arcing and caused the fire may be obvious, it would be difficult to show when the arcing started.