Professional indemnity for the firm that has outgrown the direct-insurer funnel.
The missing middle: professional indemnity insurance for firms too big for online, too small for the corporate desk
There is a gap in the professional indemnity market, and if you run an owner-managed professional firm you may already be standing in it. On one side sit the online and direct insurers built for small, standard risks: fast, cheap, and comprehensively unable to deal with anything unusual. On the other side sit the corporate broking teams at the largest global houses, geared for listed companies and multinationals with risk managers on staff. Between the two is the firm that has quietly become complex, needs a higher limit or a layered programme, and finds that nobody in either camp is really built to serve it.
This page is written to help you work out whether that firm is yours, and what a properly resourced placement looks like when it is.
How to tell you are in the missing middle
Most firms slide into this position gradually. Revenue grows, the client base broadens, one or two engagements become materially larger than the rest, and the risk profile shifts underneath a policy that was set up for a simpler business. A few signs that you have crossed over:
- Your required limit of indemnity has moved beyond what a single primary insurer wants to write on its own, so you need excess layers stacked above a primary policy.
- Online quote engines start declining you, referring you to an underwriter, or returning terms that plainly do not understand what you do.
- You have more than one professional discipline under one roof, or a subsidiary, an overseas element, or contractual liability wording that a standard proposal form cannot capture.
- Your larger clients now impose their own insurance requirements in contracts, and you are being asked to evidence specific limits, aggregation terms, or run-off provisions.
- You have had a notification, a circumstance, or a claim, and renewal has stopped being a formality.
None of this makes you a corporate risk. It makes you a mid-market risk, and mid-market risks are placed on their individual merits by a broker who can put your story in front of underwriters who write this business by hand. That is a different exercise from filling in a form online, and it is a different exercise from being a small account inside a very large broker.
Why the direct-insurer funnel stops working
Direct and online insurers are efficient precisely because they refuse complexity. Their pricing models reward firms that fit the template and quietly penalise, or simply decline, firms that do not. When your risk needs judgement, an algorithm cannot exercise it. What you get instead is a narrower proposal form, less room to explain a circumstance, standardised wording you cannot negotiate, and no advocate when a claim or a notification lands.
The practical cost shows up at the wrong moment. A firm that bought on price online often discovers at claim time that the wording carried an aggregation clause it did not understand, an exclusion it did not notice, or a limit that turned out to be inadequate once defence costs were counted. By then the choice has already been made. Self-identifying out of that funnel before renewal, rather than after a claim, is the entire point.
What a layered and higher-limit programme actually involves
When a single insurer will not, or should not, carry your whole limit, the answer is a layered programme: a primary policy that responds first, with one or more excess layers sitting above it. Structured well, this is not simply more paper. It is a deliberate piece of engineering, and the details decide whether the cover holds together when it is tested.
- Consistent wording between layers. Excess layers should follow the form of the primary, so a claim that triggers the primary flows cleanly upward without a coverage gap opening between layers.
- Aggregation and reinstatement. How claims aggregate, and whether the limit reinstates, can matter more than the headline number. A large limit that aggregates unfavourably can be worth less than a smaller one that does not.
- Deductible structure. The right retention balances premium against the exposure you are comfortable carrying yourself, and it should be set deliberately rather than defaulted.
- Insurer security across the tower. Every carrier in the programme should be financially sound and committed to the class, so a layer does not evaporate at renewal or at claim.
Building and maintaining that tower is ongoing work. It needs a broker who negotiates each layer, keeps the wordings aligned year to year, and manages the renewal so the whole structure holds rather than drifting apart as individual insurers change appetite.
The economics of a named broker
Apex runs a named-broker model. Every client has a named, director-level contact who owns the relationship end to end: the placement, the claims advocacy, and the renewal. That person knows your firm, your history, and your programme without having to be briefed from scratch each year.
The economics of this matter for a mid-market firm specifically. At a very large broker your account is small, so it is handled by whoever is available, and continuity is a matter of luck. At the online end there is no adviser at all. The named-broker model is built for exactly the firm in between: substantial enough to need real advocacy and continuity, not so vast that it warrants an in-house risk team. You get a senior broker who carries your relationship personally rather than a call-centre queue or a rotating junior.
That continuity compounds. A broker who has placed your programme for several years, presented your risk to underwriters, and handled your notifications builds credibility in the market on your behalf. It is a large part of why our client retention sits at around 95 per cent, and retention on both sides, clients and the broker relationship, is what makes the model work.
Access to the right markets
Placing mid-market PI well depends on reaching insurers who actually want to write it. Apex holds direct authorisation from the FCA under FRN 724952 and works with access to more than 30 qualifying and professional-lines insurer markets, including specialist underwriters who write the difficult and layered risks that online insurers decline. We are directly authorised and hold our own permissions, so we answer to you rather than to a network.
We already publish detailed placement content on the areas where the middle of the market gets caught, including a guide to the SRA Minimum Terms and Conditions and material on placing genuinely difficult risks. That is the day job, not a sideline. We work across the professions the region is built on, from solicitors and accountants to architects, surveyors, engineers, management consultants and design-and-construct contractors. You can see the full range on our sectors pages.
Timing your review
The single most common mistake mid-market firms make is leaving the review too late. A layered programme cannot be assembled overnight, because every insurer in the tower has to underwrite you individually and align to the wording. If you are a solicitors' practice, your PII renews on 1 October under the SRA common renewal date, and the market gets busier the closer you push to it. Other professions have their own pressure points. The rule holds regardless: start early, give your broker room to present your risk properly, and you get better terms and a stronger structure than a rushed placement ever produces.
Frequently asked questions
How do I know if I need a layered programme rather than a single policy?
If the limit of indemnity you require, whether driven by client contracts, your regulator, or your own risk appetite, is more than one insurer is comfortable writing alone, you need excess layers above a primary policy. A named broker will assess your exposure and tell you honestly whether a single policy still serves you or whether a tower is the right answer.
We have been declined or referred by online insurers. Does that make us uninsurable?
No. It usually means your risk needs judgement that an automated model cannot apply. Referrals and declines from online insurers are one of the clearest signs that you belong in the specialist, broker-placed part of the market rather than the direct funnel. We place risks that online insurers routinely turn away.
Is a specialist broker worth it for a firm of our size?
The named-broker model is designed specifically for owner-managed firms in the middle of the market: too complex for online cover, not large enough for a corporate risk team. You get senior, continuous advocacy on placement, claims and renewal, which is where the value shows up most sharply when a notification or claim arrives.
What limit of indemnity should we be carrying?
It depends on your discipline, your regulator's minimum, the requirements written into your client contracts, and the size of the engagements you take on. We will not quote a number without understanding your firm, but setting the limit and the aggregation basis correctly is exactly the conversation a named broker exists to have with you.
When should we start our renewal review?
Earlier than you think. Layered programmes take time to assemble because each insurer underwrites you individually. Solicitors renew on 1 October under the SRA common renewal date and the market tightens as it approaches; other professions have their own peaks. Give yourself and your broker several weeks of runway rather than days.
Are you tied to particular insurers?
No. Apex is directly authorised and regulated by the FCA under FRN 724952 and holds its own permissions. We work with access to more than 30 qualifying and professional-lines markets and place your programme on its merits, not to satisfy a network arrangement.
Get a quote / Speak to a broker
If your firm has outgrown online cover but does not warrant a corporate risk team, you are exactly who we are built to serve. Tell us about your firm and the limit you need through our quote request, ask us about a bundled or commercial programme via our commercial quote form, or contact the team to speak directly with a director-level broker who will own your placement, claims advocacy and renewal from the first conversation.