Homeworker clause - interpretation

swagman

In seeking quotes for home insurance, with my wife teaching languages in the home for 6 hours per week, the aim is to cover, for example, a pupil tripping and injuring themselves. There is no need for liability cover for professional advice.

Two offers of cover have been made. Firstly the following clause is suggested in a Heath Lambert policy (via Coventry Homecare). Can someone used to these things comment on whether it looks to give the required cover please:
".. it is hereby agreed that, under what is not covered in buildings and contents liability, liability arising from any trade or business activity is extended to include your legal liability, as defined therein, arising out of the use of the home, provided always that liability arising out of advice given or services rendered in respect of your profession, occupation or business is not covered."

The second offer from Churchill, at a much cheaper premium, is that I should make a note of an RH code which has been given to me by telephone, this code identifying the person in the "TRU" department who has agreed to cover the use of the home as specified (6 hours per week). In the event of any claim I quote that code (As well as the code I have the date and time and call centre name of the person making this check with TRU).

This feels rather less secure! Any comments?

Dave101t

why not have any student learning in the house sign a legally binding waiver against claiming for any such injury as could be reasonably expected in any home? (falling down stairs, walk into a door etc)

mattymoo

Dave101t wrote: »

why not have any student learning in the house sign a legally binding waiver against claiming for any such injury as could be reasonably expected in any home? (falling down stairs, walk into a door etc)

The law does not permit you to impose contract terms (which the waiver would be) that seek to avoid or limit your liabilities for death or injury. So no, such a waiver would not have any legal weight.

You can however limit / avoid your liability for damage or loss to property. That is why you see "Vehicles parked at own risk" signs.

dacouch

The Heath Lambert Policy is offering cover for Liability for your profession, the endorsement also notes they exclude advice and failure to perform.

You should check what if any exclusions are on the contents cover as its typical for them to impose restrictions on the theft cover eg say theft is only covered if there are signs of a violent or forcible entry

swagman

dacouch wrote: »

You should check what if any exclusions are on the contents cover as its typical for them to impose restrictions on the theft cover eg say theft is only covered if there are signs of a violent or forcible entry

The policy says theft is excluded when: "loss or damage whilst the home is lent, let or sublet unless the loss or damage is caused by a violent and forcible entry."
No mention of forced entry when the home is not let etc.

However this policy is £292. I suppose another option is a specific business policy, for which I have Groupama at £52 and Glemham at £47, plus an 'ordinary' buildings / contents policy for which I have quotes in the £150 - £220 region.

If one has a specialist policy just for business, presumably one still needs to declare to a home insurer that such use exists? Would some home insurers still not quote in those circumstances?

dacouch

If you are thinking of taking seperate business insurance you must advise your "Ordinary" home insurers that of the tuition, if you do not advise them it can give them the opportunity to decline claims.

If you speak to some one and they agree make sure you take their name and the date / time. If possible it is best to get them to confirm it in writing