Multidisciplinary Engineering Consultant, Renewable and Overseas Exposure

A multidisciplinary engineering consultant came to Tank needing Professional Indemnity and Public Liability cover for a developing practice. The work spanned several disciplines: structural design consulting made up the bulk of it, with smaller portions of project management, electrical engineering and mechanical engineering.

This was not a simple low-risk consultancy. The business advised on schools and government projects, with a meaningful share of renewable energy work and a small overseas component. Many of the consultant's prospective clients would expect a certificate of currency before engaging, so getting both covers in place mattered commercially, not just operationally.

A broad "engineering consultant" label was never going to do the risk justice. The mix of disciplines, the renewable energy exposure and the overseas clients all needed to be set out clearly, or the submission risked being read as something it was not.

We started by understanding exactly what the consultant did, and just as importantly, what they did not do. A vague occupation description invites the wrong assumptions from underwriters, so we built a precise picture before going to market.

Our submission set out:

• The discipline split: structural design consulting as the core, with project management, electrical and mechanical engineering as smaller components
• The industry split: schools and government projects as the majority, with renewable energy and a small amount of other work
• The geographic split: predominantly New South Wales, with a small overseas component
• The exclusions that matter: we confirmed the consultant had no involvement in PLC or SCADA control-system work, which narrowed a key technology concern
• Limits, experience and scale: the requested PI and PL limits, supporting CV and experience, and the size of the business

With that detail in hand, we approached markets with appetite for technical engineering risks rather than generalist insurers likely to refer or decline on sight.

The renewable energy work and the overseas component were the sticking points. Both pushed the risk outside standard appetite, and several markets referred or declined on that basis: one on the occupation itself, others specifically citing renewable energy and overseas client exposure.

The PLC and SCADA question was central. Control-system involvement materially changes how an engineering risk is viewed, so confirming the consultant did none of that work removed an objection before it could become another decline.

The Public Liability side carried its own consideration. The cover needed to sit comfortably alongside the professional advice exposure, rather than being treated as an afterthought.

A specialist underwriting agency was able to provide terms where several other markets had referred or declined.

The combined annual premium for both policies came in at approximately $8,500. With cover in place, the consultant can tender for the project work the practice was built for.

The wider lesson holds for any engineering consultant with a mixed profile: do not rely on a generic occupation description. If the work includes renewable energy, overseas clients, project management or several disciplines at once, the submission should explain the split clearly and call out the high-risk activities that are not performed. That clarity is often the difference between a referral and a placement.