Irwell Insurance is helping combat homelessness within Greater Manchester

On International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, Irwell Insurance is delighted to announce our 12-month commitment to supporting Mustard Tree – to give back to our local Manchester community.

Manchester has one of the highest rates of homelessness, with 1 in 74 people experiencing homelessness and rates rising by 34% per year in Manchester alone.

Mustard Tree aims to tackle the root causes of homelessness, specifically unemployment, addiction and long-term sickness and offers support for people from all walks of life across their three sites including the main community hub based in Ancoats.

Mustard Tree gives a hand up, not just a handout.

Through their ‘Freedom Project’ they provide training courses and classes to give people life skills and work experience to help them escape poverty. Their hubs provide a welcoming and safe environment, with an emphasis on creating positivity and ambition.

Featuring a community shop, a kitchen and coffee shop offering dishes made by trainees and food donated by local independent stores, Mustard Tree offers a thriving environment for those looking to gain and develop vital life and employment skills.

Everyone is welcome to drop by and sample the delicious breakfast and lunch menu or browse the shop for clothes and furniture. Supporting these services makes the world of difference – not only raising vital funds but also building confidence and employment skills to last a lifetime – from baristas and PAC testers to sales assistants and chefs.

Irwell Insurance is committed to a 12-month partnership by actively taking part in staff volunteer days as well as fundraising activities including the Manchester Marathon, Tough Mudder and even abseiling!

“We are delighted to be supporting this wonderful, deserving and much-needed charity. The response from our staff to get involved in volunteering and fundraising has been inspiring.

We are looking forward to supporting Mustard Tree make a difference to people living in poverty in Manchester – everyone deserves to have the dignity and security of a home and employment.”

Giles Reading, Chief Executive Officer

“Delighted is an understatement that Irwell has committed to supporting Mustard Tree! Over the next 12 months, their financial donations and hands-on, practical support will help change people’s lives.”

Rachel Crank, Fundraising Officer

To find out more information about Mustard Tree and how they are helping to prevent poverty, visit their website  www.mustardtree.org.uk

If you wish to donate to Mustard Tree please do so via this link- https://www.justgiving.com/page/irwell?utm_medium=FR&utm_source=CL

Mustard Tree services at a glance

  • Provide training courses to build life skills
  • Freedom project – gaining work experience to help them find permanent employment
  • Welcome people from all walks of life – those starting off their journey with Mustard Tree (in urgent need) to those who have escaped poverty but need a little extra support (furniture for their new home for example)
  • Classes and clubs – writing a CV, English lessons and art workshops
  • 40% of items are given for free and vouchers can be used in the food bank

What ‘rejection’ means for employers under The Employment Rights Bill

MPs in the House of Commons decisively rejected most of the amendments proposed by the House of Lords to the Employment Rights Bill. In doing so, they reaffirmed the Government’s intention to preserve the core protections originally proposed – rather than dilute them.

This landmark parliamentary moment matters considerably for employers.

The rejection is more than a procedural victory for Government; it gives clearer shape to the legislative direction and offers a signal to organisations to act now.

Preserving ‘day-one’ unfair dismissal protections

Perhaps the most consequential amendment the Lords sought was to insert a six-month qualifying period before unfair dismissal rights could be claimed – essentially rolling back the proposed “day-one” protection.

MPs refused that move. This is a signal that the Government intends to make unfair dismissal rights effective from the start of employment (subject to limited carve-outs) as originally promised.

For employers, that means dismissal risk increases earlier in the employment relationship. The days when ‘outsourcing risk’ to probationary periods with impunity are effectively over.

Robust procedures, immediate documentation and fair processes will be more critical than ever from day one.

Firming up worker protections

Other amendments struck down include proposals to narrow the new obligations around zero- or low-hours contracts and to weaken whistleblower protections or the right to accompany at disciplinary hearings. The rejection also cements in principle the extension of rules voiding NDAs in harassment and discrimination cases.

This suggests Parliament is pushing for relatively strong protections – not just minimal tweaks.

Reduced uncertainty

By rejecting numerous Lords’ changes, MPs reduce some of the legislative ambiguity. Employers can now plan more confidently around the bill’s core contours, rather than contending with extreme swings in possible outcomes.

The Commons’ action sends a strong political signal: the Government is standing by its manifesto agenda for worker rights, and it is unwilling to make radical compromises.

This further cements the commitment to embedding a ‘pro-worker’ framework.

Key implications for employers

The rejection of amendments does not just reconfirm intent – it changes how employers should prepare.

1. Reassess probationary periods and dismissal policies

With day-one unfair dismissal protections likely to remain, employers must revisit the role and limits of probationary periods. Rather than relying on them as a safe ‘trial’ period, organisations will need to build in stronger procedural safeguards (notice, documentation, opportunities to address performance) from the outset. Dismissal decisions will be more exposed to challenge – even early on.

2. Audit contracts, zero-hours arrangements and request rights

Any workforce with zero- or low-hours contracts will be under closer scrutiny. The employer obligation to offer a guaranteed hours contract may not be ‘on request only’ so employers should assess whether their current contract templates and policies comply with potential new standards. The risks of under-structuring casual, agency or variable-hour work will increase.

3. Strengthen grievance, disciplinary, whistleblowing and NDA policies

Given that protections around accompaniment, whistleblowing and NDA restrictions are likely to be more robust, employers must revisit those policies now. Guidance, training and clarity will be needed to avoid inadvertent breaches. Employers should build ‘right to speak out’ cultures that safely accommodate internal reporting and ensure their NDA structures do not contravene the new prohibitions.

4. Prepare for more tribunals and litigation risk

Stronger rights for employees increase the risk of employment challenges. Employers should expect more claims, and should prepare for and forecast the financial, procedural and reputational impact.

Pre-emptive investment in documentation, early resolution strategies, mediation and insurance or alternative dispute resolution procedures will be essential.

5. Manage change, culture and risk

With many of the details yet to be fleshed out in secondary legislation, employers must manage the transition carefully. Planning for change, flexible adaptation and internal communications will be key. Organisations that adopt an employee-centred culture may convert legal compliance into a competitive advantage in talent attraction, retention and reputation.

6. The growing importance of legal expenses insurance

With dismissal rights extending from day one and stronger worker protections across contracts, NDAs and whistleblowing, the likelihood of disputes progressing to tribunal is set to rise.

Even well-intentioned employers may find themselves defending claims that are time-consuming and costly. Legal expenses insurance will therefore become an increasingly valuable safeguard, helping businesses cover the costs of defending employment claims and giving them access to expert legal advice from the outset.

For many organisations, particularly SMEs with limited in-house HR or legal resources, such protection could prove critical in navigating this new risk landscape.

A turning point for employers

The Commons’ rejection of the Lords’ amendments marks a pivotal turning point in the unfolding landscape of UK employment law.

It signals that the legislative wind is blowing toward tougher protections, not retrenchment. For employers, the window for reactive adjustment is narrowing – those that wait until the last moment will risk being overwhelmed and exposed.

Yet the challenge also presents opportunity.

Organisations that seize this moment to embed procedural rigour, fairness from day one and a culture of respectful transparency will be better placed not just to comply – but to thrive in a world of heightened worker expectations and tighter employment legislation.

SMEs are big business. But SME underinsurance is a big problem.

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of the UK economy. 5.5 million businesses account for 99.8% of the business population, three-fifths of employment and around half of turnover in the UK private sector.[1]

They may be small, but they are mighty!

But their size and agility can often mask vulnerabilities. SMEs must navigate a myriad of ever-evolving legal and regulatory challenges – often without the support of in-house HR, compliance or legal teams.

But legal and liability risks when left unchecked can expose SMEs to financial and reputational damage that few can afford. The challenge is not simply recognising these risks but ensuring that the insurance protection in place is robust enough to respond when claims arise.

Risk and recovery

Unfortunately, underinsurance is a recurring theme in the SME space. It is estimated that as many as 80% of UK SMEs are underinsured with some properties insured for just 63% to 68% of their actual rebuild value.[2]

When the condition of average clause is tiggered, this results in proportionately reduced claim payouts – from which many would be unable to recover from the financial impact of such a significant uninsured loss.

A growing proportion of small businesses do not have any insurance at all while those that do often fail to review their cover needs when their circumstances change.

No employers’ liability is a growing liability

Another concern is that although employers’ liability is compulsory in the UK, research from the British Insurance Brokers Association (BIBA) found that 26% of SMEs stopped buying EL and 22% stopped buying professional indemnity insurance in 2023[3].

But every business that employs one person or more must legally take out at least £5 million of EL cover from an authorised insurer.

But some small businesses wrongly believe that if they work from home or no customers visit their premises that they do not need any form of liability insurance.

Businesses who do not have employers’ liability in place can be fined up to £2,500 by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) for every day they do not have appropriate insurance. They can also be fined £1,000 if they fail to display an EL certificate or refuse to share it with inspectors when requested.

Underinsurance exposed

Underinsurance can easily slip under the radar – until a major loss or claim. But the persistence of underinsurance among SMEs is rarely down to wilful neglect.

More often, it stems from a combination of factors: policies purchased on cost rather than suitability, a lack of understanding of indemnity limits and exclusions – and policy limits that have not kept pace with business growth and operational change or even seasonal fluctuations.

Specialist businesses need specialist insurance

Another emerging trend is that some micro businesses are purchasing commercial cover with the same mindset as personal insurance. They are buying based on price – not policy cover and purchasing online rather than via a trusted and specialist broker that understands the nuances of their business risk.

 Inflation has only compounded the problem further, with rising legal fees and compensation awards quickly eroding policy limits that once appeared sufficient.

Liability risk review

For SMEs, liability exposures are wide-ranging. Claims can arise from accidents on business premises, defective products, professional negligence, data breaches or employment disputes. Increasingly, directors are also under scrutiny, with regulatory investigations and wrongful act allegations placing personal liability firmly in the spotlight.

Each of these scenarios brings with it the potential for legal action, substantial defence costs, and compensation awards. For smaller businesses, the financial impact can be disproportionate.

Yet despite this, many SMEs remain underinsured, either because they do not fully appreciate the scope of their liability or because they are unaware or reluctant to increase premiums in the face of other financial pressures.

Where SMEs are most exposed

Employment practices remain a significant source of claims, with tribunals for discrimination, harassment and unfair dismissal showing no signs of slowing. Health and safety breaches, meanwhile, can result not only in compensation claims but also in heavy fines and irreparable reputational harm.

Customer-facing risks are just as pressing. A simple slip or fall on business premises can escalate into costly litigation. Businesses selling products face additional exposures if those products prove faulty, while service providers risk negligence claims where errors or omissions cause client losses.

The growing digital landscape adds another layer of complexity. Cyberattacks and data breaches have become a routine hazard, and with GDPR requirements still firmly in force, the penalties for mishandling data can be severe.

Finally, contractual obligations can create hidden exposures. SMEs often sign agreements that transfer liabilities onto them without realising that their insurance does not extend to cover these responsibilities. This contractual risk is particularly problematic in supply chain-dependent sectors, where liability can cascade down to the smallest players.

The consequences of falling short

For SMEs, the consequences of underinsurance are rarely confined to financial loss. The reputational damage associated with a claim – particularly one that becomes public can deter customers, unsettle suppliers, and weaken investor confidence.

Operationally, defending a claim can divert management focus and disrupt normal business activities. For directors and officers, the personal stakes are even higher, with individual assets at risk if claims fall outside company cover.

These consequences underline the vital role insurer, MGAs and broker partnerships play in identifying risks early and ensuring clients are not left exposed.

Avoiding the underinsurance gap

Annual reviews should not be seen as a box-ticking exercise but as an opportunity to reassess cover in line with growth, diversification, regulatory change and economic realities such as inflation.

Equally important is clarity around policy wordings. Many SMEs assume they are covered for risks that in reality fall outside the scope of their policy.

By working through exclusions, clauses, sub-limits and indemnity periods with clients, insurers can ensure expectations are aligned with reality – and highlight areas where additional protection is required.

Prevention is better than cure

Positioning insurance as a critical element of business resilience can help SMEs view cover as an investment rather than a grudge expense.

In a climate where legal risks are both diverse and growing, the reassurance of robust liability and legal expenses protection is invaluable.

With the right insurance partner, underinsurance can be turned from a persistent threat into a preventable risk.

That’s why our liability policies include a health and safety review – and why we don’t provide standard one-size fits all cover. Because no two businesses are alike. And neither are the sector risks they face.

What’s good for the goose is not always good for the gander.


[1] UK Small Business Statistics | FSB Business Data

[2] Underinsurance remains a problem for UK businesses – report | Insurance Business UK

[3] 50+ UK Business Insurance Statistics 2024 | money.co.uk

Celebrating 2 years of Consumer Duty

How Consumer Duty has changed the industry – for better or for worse – and what comes next?

It’s been two years since the implementation of Consumer Duty. This industry-disrupting regulation was introduced by the FCA to boost standards across the industry – pushing providers to prioritise and evidence positive outcomes for customers.

Consumer Duty was developed to deliver good customer outcomes in products and services, price and value, consumer understanding and consumer support.

With varying degrees of enthusiasm to outright cynicism, Consumer Duty was greeted with mixed reactions by those charged with implementing it.

Some saw it as a game changing opportunity to create a customer-centric culture, while others felt it was ‘lip-service’ that got in the way of doing their day job – a series of very expensive tick boxes that would blow over in time.

It didn’t. And it won’t.

Two years later, it’s here to stay and continue the party of putting customers first.

The good, the bad and the ugly

As with several regulatory resets over the years, implementing Consumer Duty put pressure on management time and resource – and undeniably squeezed profit margins.

But for other firms, Consumer Duty has enabled them to genuinely glow-up their client strategies with greater focus on fair pricing, clear and transparent communications and better support for vulnerable clients.

Two years on, the duty remains the regulation holy grail for insurers who stand by the mantra of doing right by customers.

Businesses thriving under Consumer Duty have gone beyond just treating customers ‘fairly’ – they place them at the centre of their business model!

Putting our clients first

At Irwell, we have embraced the opportunities presented by Consume Duty.  We have implemented several measures to align our client relationships with the duty’s best practice guidance.

Firstly, we have improved the clarity around our terms and conditions in policy wordings. For example, our LEI policy wording has been updated to emphasise that customers should seek and follow advice. We have also provided practical examples within the wording where the customer may need advice which gives added reassurance and makes the wording more relatable.

In line with the regulator’s focus on improving MI to help identify, evidence and monitor the delivery of good outcomes, we have introduced a comms monitoring and training programme and updated our processes to provide quicker claims determination – a critical element of improving the customer experience.

Consumer Duty puts greater responsibility on the whole distribution chain to share client information to ensure that products and services meet the required standards. At Irwell, our business is built on mutually beneficial and respectful partnerships, so we welcome this initiative with open underwriting and product development arms. We collaborate closely with our partners to help identify gaps in the market and policy provision to ensure that niche markets are better represented and protected.

Investing in Consumer Duty compliant procedures will continue to be a business priority as we expand our client base and product portfolio. We believe there is no better way to do business that putting clients first, last and foremost.

Can AI deliver CD fit for the future?

Love it or loathe it, Consumer Duty is here to stay – the only question is how will it evolve? The proliferation of AI appears to be taking over our industry.

The FCA has indicated it will make greater use of data analytics to drive decision making on business behaviour and monitoring compliance.  Digital solutions will also undoubtedly play a vital role in helping businesses comply with the evolving demands of Consumer Duty.

From automated compliance tools to digital platforms that enhance the customer journey, how can tech adoption help humans improve client engagement and experience?

How can insurers adopt a consumer-first approach when the de-humanised tech takeover seems unstoppable?

Can non-humans truly put humans first? Can AI really deliver consumer understanding? How can tech genuinely support vulnerable customers?

We believe it’s about striking a balance between tech and the human touch.

In the liability sector, when it comes to complex risks within a niche, non-standard or hazardous business you still need human relationships. You need the reassurance that a person with years of underwriting experience in mitigating business risk has meticulously reviewed your unique circumstances. You need common sense and pragmatic judgement that no standardised AI-driven data entry can offer.

But we recognise that AI and MI can offer invaluable insights and ongoing monitoring to support all compliance considerations and underwriting decisions.

Humans and robots need to work together to achieve the best outcomes. Let’s see what they bring to the next Consumer Duty party.

Protecting homes that make higher education possible

A level results day has arrived.

A day that will put an end to the waiting game and anxiety of ‘what next?’ A day that will open doors to dreams, degrees and university life for A level students around the country.

But will the Renters’ Rights Bill close those same doors as quickly as they opened – preventing students from being able to find accommodation in their chosen university city? There were 758,000 applications for full-time undergraduate places through UCAS last year – all who need somewhere decent and affordable to live.

But will they find their university dreams shattered – not by grades, but by a lack of somewhere to live?

Quite possibly yes.

Unless the Government U-turns on Section 8 of the Renters’ Rights Bill which will allow student landlords to regain possession of their properties at the end of each academic year.

Under the current proposal, only landlords letting HMOs would be able to regain their properties to re-let to next year’s student intake. One and two-bed student properties would be excluded – despite these smaller homes accounting for around a third of student accommodation in the UK.

Student housing crisis

Around 30% of students across the UK live in private rented accommodation that is not in purpose-built or provided by their higher education provider. Many popular university cities are already struggling to put roofs over the heads of their students – which is forcing up rents and making decent student accommodation the privilege of the wealthy.

Research reveals that 65% of students say that housing now influences where they apply to study – not just the course credentials and the city social scene! Plus, almost 50% are concerned about the current shortage of suitable accommodation which forces many to stay home under the roof – and bank of mum and dad.

Unless MPs back a key House of Lords amendment to the Bill, students could face a housing shortage and cost crisis – with those from disadvantaged backgrounds being hit hardest.  

MPs have the chance to protect the UK education system by safeguarding the provision of homes that make higher education possible for all – not just the privileged few.

For those students who will be out celebrating their A level results tonight, the 8th of September could prove to be the next big ‘results day’.

Stats source: https://www.nrla.org.uk/news/mps-must-seize-final-opportunity-to-protect-access-to-higher-education