Very interesting.
There was a case a few years back in this country where an employee of a
company was held personally liable for a problem with a house survey (I seem
to recall it was a building surveyors and that he had not even written the
report). Not sure what happened and if it was appealed.
You can get insurance to cover yourself for things like this - but that only
makes you a more attractive target for the layers!
Steve Wilson, Technical Director
EPG Limited
Tel 07971 277869
www.epg-ltd.co.uk
-----( Disclaimer )-----
> >
Information contained in this e-mail is intended for the use of the
addressee only, and is confidential and may contain commercially sensitive
material. Any dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this
communication, other than for which it is explicitly intended, without
the permission of the sender is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this
e-mail in error, please advise the sender immediately and delete it from
your system. Whilst all e-mails are screened for known viruses, the company
cannot accept responsibility for any which have been transmitted.
-----Original Message-----
From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Clive
Williams
Sent: 28 May 2009 11:56
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: New Jersey's Licensed Professionals
Fonseca Fonseca wrote:
"It has been nearly a decade since I worked in Massachusetts on both
sides of the regulator/consultant fence, but as things were then it was
the individual who was licensed. An LSP would then work for a
consultancy that would provide them with cover through internal
agreements/contracts. Some LSPs would carry separate insurance as
although they may be covered by their company's insurance they could
still be fired as a result. It was also not uncommon for licenses to be
suspended or revoked if misconduct was encountered."
Interesting; I wonder what happens when the licensed practitioner
leaves the employment of the company offering the warranty on a site
and subsequently problems manifest themselves? Whilst as
professionals we are always bound by such rules as that required to
be Chartered/SiLC etc we have always operated under the umbrella of
our respective companies and it is the employer who takes the liability
for its employees actions. This move towards licensed practitioners
raises some interesting issues of liability and buck passing that would
need careful consideration of our terms of employment. Any
employment lawyers out there care to offer an opinion?
|