A worrying discovery......

[Bryony]

Does your insurance company ask for certificates? If so, who are they?, If not - Don't you think they should?

The ANT asked for a copy of my certificate with my insurance application, so I sent my ITEC Mani/pedi certificate as it was all I had at the time. As I passed my Creative FDFC during the week I rang ANT insurance to check I'd be covered as a student to do L&P until I get my certificate to send them. I was shocked to have them say they don't need it as the insurance automatically covers me for nail extensions.

As a professional body I would expect the insurance to insist on certificates and only insure people for a service when they are actually qualified to do it. Why do they not do this? Surely it makes it easier for untrained techs to go out there and dupe the unsuspecting public - If you hold insurance from a professional body you must be trained, right? I know that's what I'd think if I were Jo Public....

Is it to do with pricing? As they don't charge more for each service you offer are they worried that someone only doing manicures would complain for paying the same insurance as a tech offering all services?? If this is the case, I personally don't object to paying to paying the 'full fee' even though I currently only offer manicure & L&P. If the cost of insurance were huge, this may be an issue, but at £34 a year it's not worth arguing over taking a few quid off here and and adding few quid on there.

I'd rather it worked that I pay the 'full fee' each year and that the certificate that is issued states which services I am insured for - those for which I have supplied certificates. If, during the year, I train to use another system, I send the relevant certificate in the post and the insurers issue me a new certificate with this additional service added to my list.
I realise this is extra work for the insurance company - OK, so charge me a couple more quid on my insurance. I'd rather pay a little bit more and know that my insurance company was only insuring qualified techs, than pay less and end up being screwed in the long run due to people making claims against unqualified techs.....

We all want to give the industry a good name, be the best we can be and look after our clients; How can we do this if not even our own insurance companies ensure we're qualified?

An issue Kat & Chocolate might want to look into in their search for feedback on ANT?

Please let me know what you think.

 

[scattyfox]

Excellent question and definately needs to be looked at

 

[Saffirez]

Thats quite alarming! I would hope that you could only be insured to do a service if you had proved that you had completed the appropriate training to the standard required.

Surely an insurance company would not want to cover someone who had no formal training as they would be unlikely to be following the correct procedures, and the risks of an incident would be much higher ??

 

[The Beauty Shed]

Hi, I don't know about the ANT but I know that some insurance companies don't want to see your certificates, unless you make a claim. They kinda just expect you to have the qualifications if you are applying for the insurance (but to be honest, why would you get insurance if you didn't have the qualifications?). If you do go to make a claim and you don't have them then your claim is void.

Hope this helps.

 

[mum]

Great point to bring to everyone's attention Bryony.

The people who work in the insurance offices and administer the policies do not have a clue about qualifications, especially in the nail industry where there are so many! If it is their job to rubber stamp the qualifications how can they possibly know what all the many, many certificates mean unless they are formally recognised.

When I was involved with the INA, we introduced an insurance. However the Association had strick rules with regard to membership and every certificate was vetted by an experienced technician who knew the various 'qualification'. For example, we would not accept Certificates of Attendance only those of Achievement (a lot of people hated this but we stuck to it)

The responsibility of allowing a qualified technician to join and therefore be eligible for insurance was ours and we took it very seriously.

If this is not being done then the clause in any policy that refers to 'qualified' may well be brought into question if there is a claim!! It will all depend on what the deal is. We all know that insurance companies will not pay up if there is any doubt.

Yes, it probably does mean that there are many uninsured practising technicians out there. Another example of why this industry needs to be dragged into what should be a real 'professional' service. As ususal it all stems from education.

Incidentally, I am in the process of finding out how long it will be before the London local authorities will insist on full NVQ's for licensing. This will have a huge impact on many salons. The existence of full NVQ's will eventually have an impact on this subject too!! They, or their equivilent, will be necessary for insurance at some point.

Marian

 

[dee]

i thought it was odd too, when i got my first insurance you didnt have to send your certificates in , but i am also with babtac and for that you do , and it states on the certificate what you are insured for , which i prefer really ,

 

[gracy]

i was told how it works is, that if you make a claim and you DONT have the recognised certificates they just wont pay out.
i would prefer that my certs were checked before i get the insurance, then i know for sure i am covered.

 

[Bryony]

Thanks those of that shared your opinions, although worrying the number of you who've read it and only 1 person has confirmed that their insurance co. asks for certificates.......

OK, so it seems that the insurers cover us for all nail services but won't pay out if we claim and have no certificates, that's them covering their own backsides. They don't lose out so why should they worry? As a tech we're not being ripped off by unqulified techs making claims so we're all right too. What's your problem?
What about our customers???

Scenario: I'm a client, my tech is insured to do L&P, her insurance certificate says so. One day there is an accident whilst I'm sitting opposite and I get monomer liquid squirted in my eye, my contact lens objects and my eye burns. There isn't an eye wash to hand and the tech doesn't know what to do. I go to A&E to discover I'm going to lose the sight in that eye.
So I sue my nail tech, she's insured right? Wrong. Her insurance doesn't pay up as she has no certificate, she didn't know what to in event of the accident as she bought the kit at wherever and never attended any training course that advised her of the safe use/ MSDS. She has no money so there is no point suing her privately, (Regardless, no amount of money will bring back my eyesight).

Ok, so it's far fetched but what I'm trying to highlight is that if we want to improve industry standards etc, we would be advise the public to make sure their tech has insurance, but if this isn't worth the paper it's written on, what's the point?

Off soap box, back to you guys.

 

[*JOANNE*]

when i first joined ant last year they did ask me to send copies of certificates

 

[buttonmoon]

i have just joined FHT for insurance and had to send black and white photocopies of my vtct certificates

x

 

[Bryony]

I had to send a copy of my ITEC certificate when I joined the ANT insurance scheme, but now I'm a member, they don't want to see any new ones I get.

I'm guessing they only want the first one to prove your qualification as this determines what price level you pay, nowt to do with making sure you are actuallt trained, as I had (naively?) assumed....