Biomedical Consultant Insurance Case Studies
Real Tank placements across biomedical R&D, biotechnology and clinical-research consulting. The pattern across all of them: clear activity boundaries unlock better underwriting decisions.
Specialist
Market access
Hard-to-place
Our focus
Australia
National broking
Recognition
The Tank take
Across Tank's biomedical and life sciences consultant placements, the submissions that won terms explained not only what the consultant did, but what they did not do: no products supplied, no patients treated, no trials sponsored, no US jurisdiction accepted - or the opposite, declared plainly.
Every example below is anonymised. Historical terms are evidence of what is possible, not a promise: a comparable business can receive different terms because activity, revenue, limits, countries, contracts, claims and insurer appetite all move.
Five consultant placements, five different lessons
Each case turned on a different boundary inside the same broad life sciences category.
A specialist biomedical engineering consultant advised on biocompatibility for implantable device development. The occupation sat outside mainstream appetite. We separated the advisory scope from any product exposure and explained the claims-made obligations to the client before binding.
The result: Combined Professional Indemnity ($1M) and Public Liability ($5M) placed through a specialist underwriter at around $1,900 annual premium.
A senior consultant provided nonclinical and translational development advice to Australian biotech clients. A broad 'biotechnology consultant' label could be mistaken for trial sponsorship or laboratory work, so the submission stated exactly what was not performed: no studies conducted, no patients, no lab attendance, no ethics responsibility, no regulatory filing sign-off.
The result: Specialist PI and public liability placed at a $2M PI limit. A separate US-inclusive option was quoted but not needed.
A consultancy delivered programme management and clinical operations services to biotech sponsors and CROs. It worked inside the clinical-trial ecosystem but did not sponsor trials, treat patients or manufacture products. We distinguished consultancy PI from sponsor-side clinical trials liability, verified retroactive-date evidence and clarified the US requirements.
The result: PI and $10M general liability with declared US exposure placed through a specialist life sciences market at around $1,500 including fees.
A long-established sole-trader brand incorporated and won new healthcare service contracts, including one with a US customer. No previous insurance, a $10M PI request and mixed tender requirements. We obtained the signed contract, documented seven years of prior work and tested both specialist life sciences and standalone PI and liability markets.
The result: High-limit combined cover placed. One market assessed the risk as better suited to standalone PI and liability than its life sciences facility; another referred the high PI limit and wrote it.
A senior scientist provided product and test design input, de-identified research data review and education, including US activities. The quoted policy carried a financial and investment advice exclusion drafted broadly enough to threaten ordinary scientific consultancy advice. We asked the underwriter to narrow the intent and confirmed the client provided no financial advice.
The result: The endorsement wording and premium were both improved before the terms were presented. The cheapest quote is not the best quote if an exclusion cuts across your actual services.
Premiums and outcomes described are specific to each client, anonymised and rounded. Your own terms will depend on your circumstances and the insurer.
How we apply this experience to your placement
Historical placements are context. Your submission gets rebuilt around your current activities.
Compare the activity
We compare your actual scope of work with placements like these, not just the job title or industry label.
Compare the structure
We check whether PI, products, public liability, medical, trials or cyber sections should be included, excluded or restructured for your risk.
Test the current market
Appetite moves. We treat historical terms as context only and obtain current terms for your present risk, then explain them before you decide.
Related life sciences guides
Explore cover by business activity
Questions about Consultant Case Studies
Yes. They are based on real Tank enquiries and placements, with client identities removed and commercial details rounded.
No. Premium depends on your present activity, revenue, limits, contracts, countries, claims history and market conditions at the time of quoting.
They remove ambiguity. Confirming that a consultancy does not sponsor trials, treat patients, handle samples or supply products lets an underwriter classify the risk as consulting rather than pricing for exposures that do not exist.
Sometimes. Other consultancies are better served by standalone PI and liability - one of the placements above was assessed exactly that way by a specialist market. The activity and available wordings determine the answer.
General information only. This page does not take account of your objectives, financial situation or needs and is not legal advice. Cover depends on the insurer, policy wording, limits, excesses, exclusions and information disclosed. Read the relevant policy documents and obtain professional advice before deciding.
Put your life sciences risk in front of the right markets
Tell us what you research, build, test, supply or operate, plus any overseas exposure. We will explain the available terms and exclusions before you decide.