invalidate insurances.

[Rupe]

Why is it not worth the paper?

 

If your sub contractor has no insurance should you be giving jobs to them?

 

For your own piece of mind you ought to be checking they have insurance.

 

If they muck up it will bight you in the rear, ambulance chasing lawyers and all that.

 

I think I'm right in saying that you need to have insurance that allows for the use of subcontractors, and then they need to have their own as well. (I know you know this Andy, just making an example)

 

Personally, my PL does not allow me to use sub contractors because at present I have no intention of using any, of course if that changed I could ammend my policy, probably wouldnt cost much.

 

So, if I had a customer who wanted some fencing doing I cant quote for it and then sub it out to a fencer (at a lower rate) regardless of weather the fencer has insurance, if I'm profiting the claim would come to me first and I'd be screwed.(although I could claim from his insurance, but I would have to do that personally, my insurers would not help, and as so I woul dend up paying for any damages and trying to claim it back from him, tricky!!) But there is nothing wrong with me giving the fencing companies name to my client and then allowing them to work together, i.e. the fencer quotes to the client and is therefore the main contractor, and if he screws up thats between him and the client, and if the client yells at me then fair enough but I dont think he can sue me just for suggesting a company to try as I am not involved in that contract. Or course if I have an agreement with the fencer that he pays me 10% then I would invoice him that fee and get paid and that all fine, I still have no inclusion in the contract for the fencing.

 

So all this insurance stuff is about who is running the contract. And the self employed bloke called in to do ground work or climbing has nothing to do with the contract between the tree company and the client and therefore has no need for insurance. If he is the sole reason for the job going wrong and damage being caused then the company hiring him in have to take responsiblity for that decision and thats what their insurance is for.

[Rupe]

No mate, you just seem to know about insurance.

 

 

Sent from Outerspace.

 

I wouldnt say I know about insurance, in fact I'm sure I know very little. But I am very aware of the misunderstandings that people have with it. Calling self employed people subbies is the main problem.

 

The other problem is thinking that not having EL means you need to employ people with their own insurance (and that always means PL) which is the greatest madness ever!!

 

Another confusion is that PL is there to protect the public. PL is not a legal requirement because the public are protected! If you have given a written quote for work with your name and address on it and you then drop a piece of wood on someones car and cause, lets say £1000 worth of damage (lets forget about claims for stress, injury, time off work etc. just pure physical damge) then be in no doubt you will be paying for it! They take you to court and you lose, its that simple you will be paying, so they are protected. PL is to cover your liability, and if working for a LA, for example, its there to cover their liability as any claim would likely go to them first.

 

Thats not aimed at you PMH. When I say "you" I mean whoever is reading my ranting!

[Hodge]

I wouldnt say I know about insurance, in fact I'm sure I know very little. But I am very aware of the misunderstandings that people have with it. Calling self employed people subbies is the main problem.

 

The other problem is thinking that not having EL means you need to employ people with their own insurance (and that always means PL) which is the greatest madness ever!!

 

Another confusion is that PL is there to protect the public. PL is not a legal requirement because the public are protected! If you have given a written quote for work with your name and address on it and you then drop a piece of wood on someones car and cause, lets say £1000 worth of damage (lets forget about claims for stress, injury, time off work etc. just pure physical damge) then be in no doubt you will be paying for it! They take you to court and you lose, its that simple you will be paying, so they are protected. PL is to cover your liability, and if working for a LA, for example, its there to cover their liability as any claim would likely go to them first.

 

Thats not aimed at you PMH. When I say "you" I mean whoever is reading my ranting!

 

No worries Rupe, its such a confusing area to be honest. But I get where you are coming from and I think other people get it now. Cheers, Hodge.

 

 

Sent from Outerspace.

[steve@black]

Is there a difference between using a sub contractor and freelance arborist sub contracting a job seems to me you give the job to someone else make a bit of profit with a bit of luck and move on , a freelance arborist will turn up at your yard or on site do what is asked of him and no obligations to him in any way , what does insurance say about this.

[Rupe]

Yes, there is a difference because the freelance arborist is NOT subcontracting the job, he's working for you.

 

So your right, in the first example you give the job to someone else and make a bit of profit, but if your still the main contractor (you quoted for the work) then you need your insurance to allow you to use sub contracotors and then the subcontractor should ideally have thier own seperate insurance. The sub contractor would then be a seperate outfit, climber plus groundcrew and work independantly.

 

In the second example, the freelancer turns up and does the work asked of him, with no obligation as you say. So he does not need insurance, anything that goes wrong is on your head and your insurance. SO there is a difference, both are ok though and insurance companies are quite happy with either arrangement.

[Arran Turner]

Yes, there is a difference because the freelance arborist is NOT subcontracting the job, he's working for you.

 

So your right, in the first example you give the job to someone else and make a bit of profit, but if your still the main contractor (you quoted for the work) then you need your insurance to allow you to use sub contracotors and then the subcontractor should ideally have thier own seperate insurance. The sub contractor would then be a seperate outfit, climber plus groundcrew and work independantly.

 

In the second example, the freelancer turns up and does the work asked of him, with no obligation as you say. So he does not need insurance, anything that goes wrong is on your head and your insurance. SO there is a difference, both are ok though and insurance companies are quite happy with either arrangement.

 

thanks man, well explained :001_smile:

[Arborisk Team]

Random one this, only found out today that if any of your subies does not have insurances in place it will invalidate all of your own insurances , came from reading the small print of Arborisk policy. Discuss.

 

Hi Jesse

 

We think that you may have misunderstood some of your policy wording. If you give us a call we can talk you through it - 0113 259 3560

 

Thanks

Jessica

[doobin]

Jessica, can you not clarify here for us all to learn?

 

I read it as follows (simplification of original posts TBH)

 

If XXX Tree Surgeons charge Joe Bloggs £5000, and are quoted £4000 by YYY Tree Surgeons, then of course XXX's insurance will not cover YYY

[detritus21]

Insurance tends to have 2 different kind of subcontractors. 1 is bona fida subcontractors. These are the jobs where you get another firm in to do the work with no supervision. They are there to make there own decisions with no guidance. Effectively it is there job although you are making money off it. These should have own PLI

 

Labour only subcontractors are freelance arborists, groundies and laborers or anyone else who are working self emplyed under your supervision. These are not really subcontractors but employed on a casual basis. You as the contractor should have ELI and PLI which will cover incidents if any were to occur.

[Rupe]

Insurance tends to have 2 different kind of subcontractors. 1 is bona fida subcontractors. These are the jobs where you get another firm in to do the work with no supervision. They are there to make there own decisions with no guidance. Effectively it is there job although you are making money off it. These should have own PLI

 

Labour only subcontractors are freelance arborists, groundies and laborers or anyone else who are working self emplyed under your supervision. These are not really subcontractors but employed on a casual basis. You as the contractor should have ELI and PLI which will cover incidents if any were to occur.

 

That's a good description, except Labour only workers are not sub contractors in any way because there is no "sub" contract.