For UK private medical consultants
Your medical indemnity hasn't been reviewed in years, and you're probably paying too much or covered for too little
Most UK private consultants set up indemnity when they first went private and never revisit it. Clinical activity, case complexity, and insurer competition have all changed. Your cover may not have kept pace.
Cost of Inaction
Enter your current annual premium and the procedures you avoid because of cover limits. The calculator shows the annual cost of overspend and turned-away work.
How it breaks down
- Premium overspend vs market£3,360
- Income from restricted procedures£3,600
Two minutes, no typing, and I read every one myself.
From Paul
Tell me where that £6,960 is coming from, and I'll come back with the three things to fix first.
A few quick questions, about two minutes, and no typing. I read every one myself and reply with the three things costing you most and where I'd start. If it's useful, we talk. If not, you've still got a clear picture.
No obligation, no sales call unless you ask for one, and nothing automated lands in your inbox.
Paul, Solvable
- A consultant surgeon has not reviewed their indemnity since moving from employed NHS work to full private practice, the policy still reflects their old low-risk profile and is likely to exclude several procedures they now perform.
- A clinic director assumes their discretionary MDO membership provides contractual certainty, it does not, and they have no recourse if a claim is declined.
- A consultant retiring in 12 months has no run-off cover arranged, all private work from the past decade remains exposed to claims that could arrive for years after they stop practising.
- A claim arises in an area the provider deems outside normal scope, discretionary cover is withheld and the clinician is personally liable for legal costs and damages.
- Premiums are paid at rates significantly above the market, money that could fund clinical development, staffing, or equipment is absorbed by an uncompetitive policy.
- A gap in cover emerges between policies or during a period of career change a claim arising from work done during that gap has no protection
- Regulatory investigation or GMC referral triggers a response from the indemnity provider that falls short of what the clinician expected too late to remedy.
- Run-off cover is not in place on retirement or career change, leaving historic private practice work exposed to future claims
The annual cost of clinical negligence claims in England has more than tripled over two decades, reaching £3.6 billion in 2024–25, with very high-value claims of £1 million or more accounting for 68% of all costs despite being only 2% of claims by volume. The UK medical malpractice insurance industry reached £1.8 billion in revenue in 2025–26, driven by surging private healthcare demand and record NHS waiting lists. The GMC's Good Medical Practice 2024 explicitly requires clinicians to regularly review their indemnity cover, reflecting growing regulatory concern about practitioners holding inappropriate or inadequate protection. Discretionary indemnity providers are not regulated by the FCA or the Prudential Regulation Authority, have no legal obligation to pay claims, and are not required to hold sufficient reserves, leaving clinicians with no consumer protection recourse if cover is denied. The professional indemnity market softened in 2024–25 with increased insurer capacity and rate reductions, providers who have not reviewed their cover are likely overpaying relative to current market rates.
Source: NAO Costs of Clinical Negligence Report, October 2025 · GMC Good Medical Practice 2024 · IBISWorld UK Medical Malpractice Insurance Industry Report, March 2026 · Themis Clinical Defence Indemnity Analysis 2024 · Switcha Professional Indemnity Market Review 2025
Frequently asked questions
Why does this problem persist?
Cover was set up at the start and renews automatically There is no prompt to compare providers or scope of cover Reviewing it feels like effort for an uncertain saving
What is the cost of leaving it unaddressed?
A consultant paying £12,000 per year in indemnity premiums on a policy that has not been reviewed in three or more years is likely paying above current market rates in a softened market, and may simultaneously hold cover that does not reflect their actual clinical activity. The dual risk is overpaying for protection that may not respond when needed, a financial and professional exposure that a single annual review could identify and correct.
This is exactly what I do with UK private practices. Answer the few questions above and I'll come back personally with where to start. Paul.