SOFTWARE ENGINEER PI CASE STUDY
Sole Trader Developer -Two Declines, Three Renewals
A senior software developer with no prior insurance came to us after failing to place cover through an online platform. We placed through a specialist underwriter and renewed the policy three consecutive times.
THE SITUATION
A sole trader software developer based in northern Sydney came to us having never held professional indemnity insurance. With over a decade in the industry, average client contracts running at $50,000 to $100,000, and activities spanning software development, design, database management, and day-to-day operational support, the case for PI cover was clear.
Before reaching us, he had attempted to obtain cover through an online aggregator platform. Two of the major insurers on that platform declined his application on occupation grounds. A third insurer referred the submission rather than quoting directly. None of these outcomes resulted in a policy being placed.
He needed $1 million PI cover and a broker who could actually get to a result.
OUR APPROACH
We assessed the risk profile and went to market through our own channels rather than the same online platforms that had already declined him.
Our approach:
- Specialist underwriter access: We approached Woodina, a specialist underwriting agency with appetite for software and IT consulting risks that generalist platforms often decline
- Direct placement: By going direct to the underwriter rather than through an aggregator, we avoided the margin loading and occupational classification mismatches that had caused the earlier declines
- Revenue-appropriate pricing: With annual revenue of around $110,000, we matched the risk profile accurately and placed the policy at a competitive premium
We placed the policy through Woodina at inception and managed the relationship from there.
THE CHALLENGES
The initial placement demonstrated something worth noting about online platforms. Two of the major insurers on the aggregator declined the application at inception. At the first renewal, both of those same insurers quoted on the same platform at higher prices than we could achieve through our direct channel. Platform outcomes for the same insurer and the same occupation can change year to year, and the initial decline doesn't necessarily reflect what that insurer would do at renewal.
At the third renewal, the developer's revenue had dropped significantly - by close to half. Updating this required us to go direct to the underwriter to resolve manually, rather than through standard renewal channels.
THE OUTCOME
The policy was placed and renewed three consecutive times. Cover was maintained continuously throughout.
PI cover placed with Woodina at $1M limit. Renewed twice through the same underwriter. Third renewal required manual underwriter intervention to resolve a revenue update, handled through direct broker contact. Active policy maintained throughout.
A useful benchmark from this engagement: at the first renewal, we compared our direct placement against four options available through a major online aggregator. Our placed premium was competitive with the cheapest aggregator option on price, and that cheapest option came from one of the same insurers that had declined the initial application entirely. The direct underwriter relationship and the placement history we had built with Woodina made our channel more reliable, not just competitive on price.
The case also highlights why contract size matters when assessing whether PI is worth the premium. With average client contracts of $50,000 to $100,000, a single professional negligence claim could easily dwarf several years' worth of combined premiums. The risk-to-premium ratio justified cover from the outset.
Put this placement in context
More Case Studies
All case studiesCross-Border Consultant: GBP Contract Requirements, Additional Insured Endorsement
Sole operator software consultant with cross-border revenue needing PI and PL that met specific contract requirements from a FTSE-listed client. GBP minimum thresholds, additional insured endorsement, and indemnity to principals clause confirmed. Renewed cheaper than aggregator pricing from the same insurer.
Read case study Professional IndemnityEngineering Geologist: Policy Wording Gaps Exposed
Sole-trader engineering geologist compared three PI wordings. Cheapest excluded pre-purchase reports and building certificates - core weekly services. Only one policy matched the actual scope.
Read case study Professional IndemnityMultidisciplinary Engineering Consultant, Renewable and Overseas Exposure
PI and PL placed for a multidisciplinary engineering consultant after several markets referred or declined over renewable energy and overseas exposure.
Read case studySoftware developer PI cover -placed where others couldn't
If you've been declined online or aren't sure your current policy fits your actual work, we can take your risk to market and give you a straight answer. We work with specialist underwriters that most online platforms don't access.