Education is a broad professional field. On one side sit independent consultants — SEND advisers, admissions consultants, tutors trading as businesses, curriculum specialists, education technology advisers. On the other sit independent schools themselves, most of which are constituted as charitable trusts and governed by boards of trustees or governors. Both groups face professional liability exposure, but the shape of the risk and the way cover is arranged differ in ways that matter.
Unlike solicitors or accountants, education consultants have no chartered body imposing a minimum PI limit. Cover is instead contract-driven. Local authorities commissioning SEND support, independent schools engaging external admissions advisers and parents instructing consultants on a private-fee basis frequently require a specific limit — commonly £1m or £2m each and every claim — before work begins. The statutory backdrop is the Education Act 1996, together with the SEND Code of Practice 2015 issued under section 77 of the Children and Families Act 2014, and — for independent schools — the Education (Independent School Standards) Regulations 2014.
Where a consultant advises on curriculum design, inspection readiness, or strategic questions such as merger or expansion, professional indemnity cover responds to allegations that the advice given caused a foreseeable financial loss. Typical wordings arranged through education-specialist insurers cover breach of professional duty, negligent misstatement, and — importantly for this sector — loss of documents entrusted to the consultant. Limits between £250,000 and £2m are common. The retroactive date is usually the inception of the first policy, meaning past work is covered only if cover has been maintained continuously.
Advising parents on Education, Health and Care Plans, mediation, or First-tier Tribunal (SEND) appeals is a distinct risk. The SEND Code of Practice 2015 sets out the statutory framework consultants work within, and a claim usually turns on whether advice given at a specific decision point — draft EHCP wording, appeal grounds, evidence bundle preparation — met a reasonable professional standard. Policies for SEND advisers should be arranged with insurers who understand the tribunal process; a generic small-business PI wording may exclude educational advice or cap it at an inadequate sub-limit.
Admissions consultants — the specialists who guide families through 7+, 11+, 13+ and sixth-form entry — occupy a bespoke niche. Claims tend to involve missed deadlines, incorrect advice on registration windows, or disputes over refund terms when a family withdraws. Cover here is arranged individually, often with a modest limit reflecting typical fee levels, and clients should look for policies that include a defence-costs component sitting outside the indemnity limit.
Most independent schools in England and Wales are registered charities and are therefore subject to the Charities Act 2011. Section 189 of that Act permits a charity to indemnify its trustees against certain liabilities and to purchase trustee indemnity insurance out of charity funds, provided the governing document does not prohibit it. Governors face personal exposure for breaches of trust, mismanagement, or failure to discharge statutory duties under the Independent School Standards Regulations 2014. Trustee indemnity insurance — sometimes bundled with a school's wider management liability programme — is the standard response.
Safeguarding claims — allegations of failure to protect, failure to report, or negligent supervision — are generally excluded from standard PI wordings and require a specific safeguarding or abuse liability extension. This is a distinct market, and cover terms have tightened materially since 2019. Related to this is DBS liability: schools and consultants making regulated activity checks under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 need to ensure their PI wording responds to allegations of negligent checking, misinterpretation of a disclosure, or wrongful refusal to engage.
Because PI cover is written on a claims-made basis, a governor stepping down remains exposed to claims arising from decisions taken during their tenure but notified after they leave. Run-off cover — typically six years, matching the ordinary limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980 — is the accepted response. Schools should build the cost into the transition budget when a long-serving governor retires.
An independent SEND consultant advises 40 families across a financial year on EHCP drafting and tribunal appeals. Her local authority framework contract requires PI of £2m each and every claim. Apex Insurance Brokers arranges cover with an education-specialist insurer, with the retroactive date set at the inception of her practice three years earlier. Twelve months in, a family whose EHCP appeal was dismissed alleges that the appeal grounds were poorly framed and that key evidence was omitted. The insurer accepts notification, appoints panel solicitors, and the claim is investigated. The policy responds to defence costs and, where liability is established, to any settlement within the £2m limit.
Related pillar guides include our consultants PI insurance guide, management consultants PI insurance guide, coaches PI insurance guide and charities and trustees liability guide.
Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Firm reference number 724952. This entry is general information, not advice on any particular policy.