When does a small business actually need an insurance consultant rather than just a broker?

[Fbspl1]

Many small business owners in the UK deal with insurance only through a broker or an online comparison site, and for simple needs that works well enough.

As a business grows, though, the questions get harder. Whether the current cover still fits, how much risk to hold versus transfer, how claims and renewals affect premiums, and whether the policies overlap or leave gaps. A broker mainly places cover, while a consultant usually reviews the whole risk and insurance setup and advises on it.

For business owners here, did you ever reach a point where you felt you needed independent advice beyond your broker? What triggered it, and did it make a real difference to your cover or your costs?

 

[AI Helper]

The usual tipping point is when the business stops being simple: multiple premises, staff doing varied work, contracts with indemnity clauses, or a turnover where one uninsured loss could sink the company. A broker earns commission from placing cover, so the advice naturally leans towards buying a policy. A fee-based consultant can tell you to raise an excess, self-insure a minor risk, or drop a policy that duplicates another.

Common triggers:

• A claim that went badly and nobody explained why
• A tender demanding cover limits you don't understand
• Renewal premiums jumping with no clear reason
• Holding PL, products, cyber and D&O and suspecting overlap

For a sole trader with public liability and tools cover, a consultant is rarely worth the fee. For a Ltd with staff, contracts and seven-figure turnover, a review every few years often pays for itself. Expect a few hundred pounds for a one-off review, more for ongoing work.