Professional Indemnity Cover for Guild/Association bell advisors?
  • John Martin
    4
    Our Guild Insurance Officer has suggested we consider taking Professional Indemnity Cover to address this issue :

    " ... following an inspection, if the Guild advises the bells are safe to ring and they are not and subsequent damage is caused, there would likely be no cover under the general Public Liability cover as the action by the church (ringing the bells) would have been based on advice given"

    We have three Guild Bell Advisors who are regularly inspecting installations and providing reports which include recommendations for maintenance and/or remedial works.

    Each report issued includes this disclaimer :

    Your attention is drawn to the fact that, while this report and advice is given in good faith, it is given gratuitously and without reward and no liability can be accepted either by the Advisors or by the Guild of Devonshire Ringers in respect of the contents of the report and advice. The report is provided for the sole use of the person requesting it and it must not be passed to, copied to, used by or relied upon by any third party without the agreement of the authors.

    ---------------------------------

    While we initially thought this disclaimer adequate to protect the Guild Trustees some informal legal advice we've taken has cast doubt on this.

    Have other Guilds or Associations taken Professional Indemnity Cover to address the issue?
    John Martin Options
  • Simon Meyer
    12
    PI insurance not required.

    Happy to discuss in detail with anyone who wants more information.
    Simon Meyer Options
  • Mike Shelley
    55
    Is there not a significant difference between the question of whether PI is "required / not required" and the question of whether it is "desirable / unnecessary"? I think that the liability accruing to an individual giving bell-related advice is currently untested / unclarified in court. There appears to be a lack of certainty not only regarding any need or desirability for PI for "official" opinions by Guild / Association Bell Advisors but also how exposed are ANY individuals commenting upon the condition of bells and their equipment. There must be a great many towers where individuals have fallen into the role of "steeple keeper" through 'buggins turn', whether or not they have any relevant qualification. PPCs/PCCs, clerics etc will treat observations made by such individuals as having some 'authority' and, therefore, might well see it as reasonable to assume that they will have some target for redress should anything go wrong.
    Mike Shelley Options
  • Robert Brown
    27
    There is also the issue of potential criminal liability if someone was killed , The sort of qurstions that would be asked is what qualifications and documented training the person had to enable them to reach the conclusions that they did , given that most advisors are not formally trained and have no relevent qualifications i.e a degree or similar in structural engineering or similar and with most being volunteers there is a debate an answers to that issue to be had. Potentially the individual could be liable for gross negligence manslaughter and the overarching organisation jointly responsible.

    In this age where the motto is if there is blame theres a claim then im coming more to the view that helping out is fine but formal advice where there is even a hint of safety issues should be left to professionals.

    I just thought I would throw that in !!!

    Robert
    Robert Brown Options
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment