Pli And Its Huge Potential Impact On The Soul Scene

[Pep]

I thought I'd just bring this up, having just encountered the problem when arranging the post-funeral celebration dance for my beloved wife Helen.

I don't know if it has cropped up before, but guess it probably has, and will almost certainly crop up many times again.

I booked a very nice hotel function room at the Mount Hotel in Wolverhampton for Helen's celebration dance (on April 26), only to discover a few days later that they required all the DJs to have PLI (Public Liability Insurance). Needless to say I was flabbergasted, and quickly started shopping around for at least one lot of cover. However as they required cover for every DJ, and there could be 5, 6 or 7, this was going to be prohibitive. It was necessary to make a few quick phone calls and move it to the Connaught Hotel, about half a mile away which luckily had the same night available.

It turned out to be a godsend, as the bigger Connaught ballroom looks like being necessary now to accommodate all her friends and well-wishers.

I was wondering if anyone else has encountered this, and if is it likely to become more prevalent in the future, in which case it could severely limit the number of available venues. I don't promote these days, and as a hotelier myself would never insist on it for a soul event, but not every venue owner is a fan of the music like me.

Any thoughts folks?

Regards,

Pep.

[Davekd]

I've been asked for insurance when doing a private party at a biggish venue - you can readily get up to 10 Million in cover for £50 or so. It's about insurers insisting on trying to step down thier liabilities as the venue should be insured anyway.

I would guess however if you are using the venue's equipment the liability is thiers.

Bit over the top to go for each individual DJ - mine is in the name of my club and theoretically will cover anyone DJing on the night.

Having said that, I believe it will happen more and more as time goes on and the sueing culture intensifies.

Dave

[Guest MrC]

We had the same trouble trying to organize the evening do for Paula's forthcoming wedding.

We wanted somewhere we could use our own kit and DJ, but found it amazingly difficult, everywhere wanted to supply DJ's, or have PAT test certificates for each piece of equipment, and PLI paperwork for anyone who would be DJ'ing or setting up the equipment.

In the end we found the owner of a pub down on the marina, that had let the pub to 2 of our friends for their wedding reception last year, not perfect venue, but in an ideal location, and the only place it seemed we would get in time, without having to get all the relevant insurance, electrical certs.

I've only noticed the majority of places asking for all this during the past 6 months or so, and often wondered if it affected any promoters too.

Paul

[Dave Rimmer]

I'm not sure why each DJ should need PLI, unless it's because they are operating the equipment at the time of an incident. However, I can't equate DJing with actually causing an injury to someone because I can only envisage three things happening 1. someone gets an electric shock 2.someone trips over a cable, and 3 a speaker stack falls on someone. Now non of these things are the fault of the 'operator' at the time of an incident. They are all related to the ownership of the equipment and how it was set up in a venue.

It certainly makes sense for anyone that owns the equipment to have it PAT tested annually, (and if it's hired equipment have it tested every time it's returned) and to have their own PLI though.

In fact when Chris and Mace did a nighter at The Queens Hall in Burslem, the venue itself actually PAT tested any record players and extension cables that the record dealers intended using free of charge (and a couple of people had cables that failed the PAT test so were told to remove it from the building)

[Pep]

I'm not sure why each DJ should need PLI, unless it's because they are operating the equipment at the time of an incident. However, I can't equate DJing with actually causing an injury to someone because I can only envisage three things happening 1. someone gets an electric shock 2.someone trips over a cable, and 3 a speaker stack falls on someone. Now non of these things are the fault of the 'operator' at the time of an incident. They are all related to the ownership of the equipment and how it was set up in a venue.

It certainly makes sense for anyone that owns the equipment to have it PAT tested annually, (and if it's hired equipment have it tested every time it's returned) and to have their own PLI though.

In fact when Chris and Mace did a nighter at The Queens Hall in Burslem, the venue itself actually PAT tested any record players and extension cables that the record dealers intended using free of charge (and a couple of people had cables that failed the PAT test so were told to remove it from the building)

Yes Dave, I agree it was strange and I did query it, but they were pretty adamant at the time. I could understand/accept it being required for the equipment. No mention was made of PAT testing, but I guess this is probably in the PLI smallprint.

I suppose technically an individual DJ could do something to cause injury or damage (... I remember throwing a record into the audience at the Locarno, and saying "I wasn't playing that crap again - so don't ask me").

I'm sure insurance companies could come up with a huge, pedantic list of possible public liability claim scenarios.

I doubt it reduces Hotel insurance premiums one iota, so is yet another means of extracting more insurance client premiums.

Yet another bi-product of 'health and safety gone mad', in turn itself a result of 'litigation culture' - one of our less useful American imports.

Regards, Pep.

Edited April 23, 2012 by Pep