HIGH-LIMIT PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY CASE STUDY
Technical Inspection Consultancy Serving Defence and Critical Infrastructure, Primary and Excess PI After Five Declines
The client sector, not the work itself, was the problem. Five of eight PI markets declined, two citing the defence and critical infrastructure client base. One built a primary and excess structure; one indicated $20,000 plus.
THE SITUATION
A NSW consultancy providing technical inspection and risk advisory services asked Tank Insurance for a full review of its professional indemnity and public liability, not just a replacement quote. Its work was carried out at client premises for defence, critical infrastructure and government clients, and it held a significant schedule of specialist inspection equipment that travelled to site.
The brief was that the wording and the insurer's understanding had to reflect the actual nature of the work.
OUR APPROACH
- Eight markets were approached. Five declined: two cited the defence, critical infrastructure and government client base, one cited industry and capacity, and two gave no reason.
- One market would only participate on an excess layer above $5 million. One indicated $20,000 plus.
- One specialist market structured the PI as a primary layer plus an excess layer, with one insurer holding both layers and public liability alongside.
- Cyber was quoted separately at $500,000 and $1 million limits, and structuring of cover for the inspection equipment was scoped.
THE CHALLENGES
Defence and critical infrastructure clients narrowed the PI market for this consultancy, because of the potential size and sensitivity of a claim rather than the likelihood of one. The markets that remain price for it.
THE OUTCOME
Professional indemnity and public liability were placed with CFC, with the PI built as a primary layer plus an excess layer, at a combined premium of approximately $16,200 a year.
Final Solution: Layered PI and public liability for a defence and critical infrastructure consultancy at around $16,200 a year, against an alternative indication of $20,000 plus, after five markets declined.
This case records one historical outcome; current insurer appetite, premium, timing and terms depend on the complete risk at the time of application.
For the wider buying context, see our high-limit professional indemnity guide.
SPECIALIST CONSULTANCY QUESTIONS
What this placement answers for other consultancies with sensitive clients
Why do PI insurers decline consultants who work for defence or critical infrastructure?
What is a primary and excess layer structure in PI?
How should specialist inspection equipment be insured?
HIGH-LIMIT PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY
Put this placement in context
Case-study results are historical and are not a promise of current pricing, capacity or policy terms. This page is general information only and does not take account of your objectives, financial situation or needs.
More Case Studies
All case studiesSole Trader Pre-Handover Inspector, $1M PI and $10M Public Liability After Occupation Declines
How we placed $1 million professional indemnity and $10 million public liability for a sole-trader pre-handover building inspector with fifteen years in building, after two insurers declined the occupation for PI and one for liability.
Read case study Professional IndemnityAdvisory Firm With Professional Standards Limit
Advisory and accounting firm secured a $2.5M costs-inclusive PI structure after markets declined or referred
Read case study Professional IndemnityEngineering Consultancy: $10M XS Layer to Reach $20M
An engineering consultancy came to Tank with a 5x5 PI structure already in place. A few months later, a larger project required $20M total cover, so we went to market for a further $10M excess layer above the existing programme.
Read case studyClients in Defence, Infrastructure or Government?
Tell us who you work for and what the contracts require. We take sensitive-sector consultancies to the markets that write them and structure the limit in layers where that helps.