Claim against Professional indemnity insurance of contractor

hollydays

Your original post is quite vague. It seems they are failing to agree to breach of contract . This does not make them reputable or reasonable-if your claims are true, so it's unsurprising they won't cooperate?

Can you give more details of the dispute?
How are you able to explain your grievance is valid?
You really need to get legal advice.

wealdroam

lyber28 wrote: »

Struggling to understand why they would not engage the insurers.

Well one reason might be that they are hoping to start up again and may well want insurance again.
The premium might be higher if they have a claim against them.

I guess they are thinking that if they can get rid of you and your claim without involving their insurers, it might be advantageous to them in the longer run.

ValHaller

wealdroam wrote: »

Well one reason might be that they are hoping to start up again and may well want insurance again.
The premium might be higher if they have a claim against them.

I guess they are thinking that if they can get rid of you and your claim without involving their insurers, it might be advantageous to them in the longer run.

That makes sense. I think the thing to do is to press on and do whatever is necessary to get this to court. If the insurance is there and they want to carry on in business, then there is no great advantage in folding the company, because OP can object to the winding up claim.and invoke the insurance via administrators.

arcon5

ValHaller wrote: »

The net effect is the same. I take it that when you say 'they' you mean the company itself can apply to be struck off. Well fair enough, OP can object - and an outstanding claim is probably a good reason to object.

The net effect is that OP does have some means of getting to a

No! The net effect is NOT the same!

An objection is nothing more than a pause button at CH. Op would have to pay around £1100 to the county court to apply for their liquidation. If accepted an OR will be assigned (very different from an administrator!) - in which case still no guarantee op would get anything (on the plus side of any money recovered from the company - if any, ops priority for the original fees, even before the receivers office).

But unless ops willing to do this, the director will simply reapply after 3 months.

ValHaller

arcon5 wrote: »

No! The net effect is NOT the same!

An objection is nothing more than a pause button at CH. Op would have to pay around £1100 to the county court to apply for their liquidation. If accepted an OR will be assigned (very different from an administrator!) - in which case still no guarantee op would get anything (on the plus side of any money recovered from the company - if any, ops priority for the original fees, even before the receivers office).

But unless ops willing to do this, the director will simply reapply after 3 months.

Voluntary striking off is not a get out of jail free card.

http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/about/gbhtml/gp4.shtml#ch1

5. Who must I inform?
The directors who make the application must, within 7 days of sending the application to the registrar, send a copy to the following persons:

• members, usually the shareholders
• creditors, including all contingent (existing) and prospective (likely) creditors such as banks, suppliers, former employees if the company owes them money, landlords, tenants (for example, where a bond is refundable), guarantors and personal injury claimants. Also, you must notify appropriate offices of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) if there are outstanding, contingent or prospective liabilities
• employees
• managers or trustees of any employee pension fund
• any directors who have not signed the form

10. Can anyone object to dissolution?
Any interested party can object to the registrar.
11. How and why can they object?
Objections or complaints must be in writing and sent to the registrar with any supporting evidence, such as copies of invoices that may prove the company is trading. Reasons could include:

• if the company has broken any of the conditions of its application for example, it has traded, changed its name or become subject to insolvency proceedings during the three-month period before the application, or afterwards
• if the directors have not informed interested parties
• if any of the declarations on the form are false
• if some form of action is being taken, or is pending, to recover any money owed (such as a winding-up petition or action in a small claims court)
• if other legal action is being taken against the company
• if the directors have wrongfully traded or committed a tax fraud or some other offence

A full list of conditions can be found in sections 1004 and 1005 of the Companies Act 2006.
12. Offences and penalties
It is an offence:

• to apply when the company is ineligible for striking-off (see question 2)
• to provide false or misleading information in, or in support of, an application
• not to copy the application to all relevant parties within seven days
• not to withdraw application if the company becomes ineligible

The offences attract a fine of up to a maximum of £5,000 on summary conviction (before a magistrates' court or Sheriff Court) or an unlimited fine on indictment (before a jury). If the directors breach the requirements to give a copy of the application to relevant parties and do so with the intention of concealing the application , they are also potentially liable to not only a fine but also up to seven years imprisonment. Anyone convicted of these offences may also be disqualified from being a director for up to 15 years.

There is no need for OP to apply for a winding up. There are protections against the company being wound up to avoid claims, particularly where there is an asset such as an indemnity insurance. OP just needs to pursue in the normal way and not be put off.

There is definitely enough there to make it difficult for this company to phoenix. Already a motivation of protecting the insurance premium has been mentioned. Is the game worth the candle to liquidate just to protect a premium? If the company has the insurance, it is an asset which is worth pursuing.

InsideInsurance

lyber28 wrote: »

Thanks all for the inputs. They are a limited company and have checked they have valid PII insurance as a part of the contract. Struggling to understand why they would not engage the insurers.

A contract would only say they need insurance, thats no guarantee that they didnt breach their contract nor that they didnt cancel the insurance the day after receiving their certificate.

Assuming they intend to keep doing contractor work then presumably they are reluctant to claim because it'll impact their premiums going forward.

Remember also that for PI insurance, unlike most other classes of personal lines or SME, it is a claims made trigger and so it is the insurer at the point a claim is made that is liable and not the insurer at the point the miss-advice occurred. If they stopped their insurance before your claim was made then they'd have no insurance in place