Do I need to be part P to inspect?

Discussion in 'Electricians' Talk' started by combiman, Apr 7, 2019.

  1. me too. your point?
     
  2. Coloumb

    Coloumb Screwfix Select

    Never mind.
     
  3. Bright sparkles

    Bright sparkles New Member

    Surely if the condition report you did says it is satisfactory then the place burns down the next day and it is proved beyond doubt that the installation was never satisfactory then your PI insurance will pay up when the owner sues you??
    My understanding is that PI is for advice given rather than any action done.
    He said it was safe - PI
    He broke it - PL
     
    Bazza likes this.
  4. Bogle Crag

    Bogle Crag Screwfix Select

    Ah but you do not say it was safe, just satisfactory at the time of inspection
     
  5. spinlondon

    spinlondon Screwfix Select

    The point of conducting the Inspection, is to ascertain whether the installation is safe for continued use.
    By stating that the installation is ‘Satisfactory’ and the date the installation should be next inspected you as the Inspector are stating the installation (barring any changes) is safe until that date.
     
  6. Bogle Crag

    Bogle Crag Screwfix Select

    How can anyone say an installation will be safe until a date in the future?
     
  7. Mr Rusty

    Mr Rusty Screwfix Select

    Yes-ish - on the right lines, but this simplification risks a misunderstanding.

    If an end-user suffers any loss through damage to property or injury to person as a result of actions of your business then this is a PL claim. The damages claimed are for damage to property/injury

    If you provide advice to a middle-man (main contractor, architect etc.) who relies on your advice to build something and that something causes damage to property or injury to third parties, then the third party will claim on the middle mans PL, BUT the middleman will then claim against your PI for FINANCIAL loss. The middleman didn't suffer any property damage or injury, they only suffered financially - loss of profit, legal costs, consequential loss (maybe depending on policy), costs of rectification.

    It is these FINANCIAL risks that PI mainly insures you against but ONLY if you are negligent (i.e. you acted with the skill and care expected of a professional in your field). If you sign up to "fitness for purpose" the claimant doesn't have to prove negligence, only that whatever you designed didn't meet the specification, in which case you could be high and dry because PI quite likely won't cover you.

    I am not an insurance professional, just someone who reads a lot of commercial contracts and policies in the course of my day job. IMHO issuing test certificates is not a PI risk. You didn't design the test standard, you didn't design the test procedure, you have no professional input in to the design of the test report. What you do is an action in carrying out a set procedure to match an installation against a set of parameters and say whether it does or does not meet those parameters. If you say it does, when it doesn't, any claim for subsequent damages will be against your action of how you carried out the test, not your professional advice on what the test consists of - Public liability

    sorry to repeat earlier posts with another long response, but this is an important distinction. Of course, like everything insurance it isn't quite black and white because there is overlap. For example, PI may also provide cover for property damage and injury to YOUR client (i.e. the middleman) as a direct result of your design/advice to them. (the beam you designed, but the main contractor installed, broke and fell on top of the main contractors head because it was too small)
     
    Bogle Crag likes this.
  8. spinlondon

    spinlondon Screwfix Select

    Why do you think someone can’t say an installation will be safe for ‘x’ amount of time?
     
  9. Bogle Crag

    Bogle Crag Screwfix Select

    Because no one can predict the future, except Mystic Meg
     
  10. Paul dendle

    Paul dendle New Member

    I'm guessing that would apply to a visual inspection which would obviously be very very limited in scope. -
     
  11. Bazza

    Bazza Screwfix Select

    I think it’s been resolved after nearly 4 years !
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice