Search Results

1-8 of 8 results for subject:Liability

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 9 February 2005, v430 c1515, on the Swan Hunter contract, whether there is legal liability to his Department arising from the unsuccessful bidder referred to; and if he will make a statement.

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Ministry of Defence

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

2 March 2005

Reference

431 c1233W; 217833

House

House of Commons

Dept of Health

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his Answer dated 13th July, what legal actions involving NHS funds have been initiated over the last five years, excluding those for clinical negligence; and if he will make a statement. - Inc table.

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Department of Health

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

14 July 2004

For answer on

1 September 2004

Answered on

1 September 2004

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to his answer dated 13 July 2004, what legal actions involving NHS funds have been initiated over the last five years, excluding those for clinical negligence; and if he will make a statement. [185210] Ms Rosie Winterton: The liabilities to third parties scheme (LTPS) is a risk pooling scheme for national health service trusts, primary care trusts and special health authorities, which provides indemnity for non- clinical risks such as employers' and public liabilities. The scheme was introduced in 1999 and is operated by the NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA). The table shows information provided by the NHSLA on the number of NHS resources spent on defending and initiating legal actions for non-clinical claims under the LTPS for the last five years. £ _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Defence costs Claimant costs Damages Total 1999-2000 17,075 7,534 9,218 33,827 2000-01 35,686 265,166 664,608 965,460 2001-02 380,412 1,487,848 3,048,665 4,916,925 2002-03 1,815,517 3,974,607 9,608,353 15,398,477 2003-04 3,214,576 3,643,407 6,881,042 13,739,025 Total 5,463,266 9,378,562 20,211,886 35,053,714 _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Notes: The amounts include funds from the LTPS and trusts' own funds for any excesses for which they may have been liable. Trusts may insure outside of the LTPS scheme in certain circumstances. The amounts above do not include costs for insurance taken outside of the LTPS scheme.

Date

1 September 2004

Reference

424 c908-9W; 185210

House

House of Commons

Treasury

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will make it his policy to remove immunity from prosecution for negligence and misrepresentations from Lloyd's; and if he will make a statement.

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Treasury

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

13 July 2004

Reference

183288; 423 c1014W

House

House of Commons

Ministry of Defence

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when his Department will reopen its life and personal accident insurance scheme to soldiers in the UK armed forces; which private insurance companies his Department has selected to cover servicemen and women liable to be involved in the war in Afghanistan who...

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Ministry of Defence

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

15 October 2001

For answer on

18 October 2001

Answered on

18 October 2001

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when his Department will reopen its life and personal accident insurance scheme to soldiers in the UK armed forces; which private insurance companies his Department has selected to cover service men and women liable to be involved in the war in Afghanistan who are not covered by PAX+ (Personal Accident and Combined Services); whether this scheme will be similar to the existing PAX+ coverage; if his Department will ensure that every soldier's coverage will be full and continuous; and if he will make a statement. [8418] Mr. Ingram: The Ministry of Defence has in place a comprehensive package of compensation schemes for injury or death resulting from service in the armed forces. The MOD's Armed Forces Pension Scheme and the War Pensions Scheme are absolutely unaffected by any commercial considerations. These schemes provide full and continuous cover for all personnel. For those who want additional cover Ministry of Defence facilitates the services of commercial insurers. As a responsible employer, MOD encourages its personnel to take out the level of cover that individuals deem necessary. However, policies are commercial undertakings between individuals and insurers. The MOD neither carries any of the risk, nor gains from any of the premium. All such schemes differ, and it is for each individual to decide what benefits, restrictions and costs are deemed appropriate. Since 1989 the MOD has facilitated a commercial personal accident policy (known as `PAX') deemed most appropriate to armed forces personnel. On 31 August 2001, 60,035 armed forces personnel (over 25 per cent.) had a PAX policy, and just under half of these took optional life cover. On 9 October the scheme's underwriters--AIG Europe (UK)--implemented an exclusion period for new applicants from 21 September. Existing holders are unaffected; they can carry out their duties knowing that their policy remains in force wherever they are in the world, on or off duty. A PAX exclusion period was last imposed during the Gulf War and a special scheme was introduced for personnel who had not bought PAX but wished to buy insurance. AIG Europe are working now to introduce a replacement for PAX, but I am unable to say how long it will take them to achieve this. This is a commercial matter for them. Since 11 September, some insurance companies have put geographical exclusions on new policies for armed forces personnel (mainly for those deploying to Oman and associated area); others have increased rates. As a result, some service personnel have found themselves without the cover they desired. However, at present there are insurers still offering worldwide personal accident and life assurance schemes, although obviously they are keeping rates and terms under close review, and the situation could change. Currently such schemes are available for example, from NAAFI Financial--through their website and 20 centres located in service garrison areas--and from Scottish Widows through the "Forces Safeguard" Policy. While MOD does not select, endorse or recommend individual companies or products without a full `benchmarking' process, the MOD is both currently advising members of the armed forces of known personal accident and life assurance options and also facilitating the completion of application forms, especially for those deployed.

Date

18 October 2001

Reference

8418; 372 c1305-6W

House

House of Commons

Dept of the Environment Transport and the Regions

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, what plans he has to change the responsibilities of water authorities whose customers have had their properties damaged because of the failure of the water authority properly to safeguard their plant and equipment; and if he will...

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

9 February 2001

Reference

362 c729W; 149081;149515

House

House of Commons

Ministry of Defence

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how much has been spent on repairs and maintenance on HMS `Ocean' since her launch.

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Ministry of Defence

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

17 November 1998

For answer on

19 November 1998

Answered on

19 November 1998

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much has been spent on repairs and maintenance on HMS `Ocean' since her launch. [60631] Mr. Spellar: As I said in my answers to the hon. Member on 11 June 1998, Official Report, column 638, and 29 June 1998, Official Report, column 12, HMS Ocean was damaged on launch and a package of repairs costing some £1.125 million was needed. The cost of these repairs was borne by MOD under its indemnity scheme. HMS Ocean was subsequently dry-docked at Portsmouth and further repairs were undertaken to her tail shaft bearings and `A' bracket bearings. The cost of, and liability for, these repairs is currently the subject of a Board of Inquiry and is not expected to be resolved before the end of the year. If MOD accepts liability for the costs involved, the information will be publicly available in the usual way. In addition, approximately £20k was incurred to repair one of the ship's switchboards an this will be recovered by the Prime Contractor under the contract. As part of her acceptance, HMS Ocean was the subject of a programme of defect rectification under an agreed procedure with the Prime Contractor. This process is common to the acceptance of all warships and the costs incurred are predominantly the responsibility of the Prime Contractor. Although this process is still underway, no costs have so far been borne by MOD. HMS Ocean has not required maintenance beyond planned routine work since her launch. We do not maintain a complete record of this maintenance centrally and it could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Date

19 November 1998

Reference

60631; 319 c720W

House

House of Commons

Ministry of Defence

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his Answer of 11th June 1998, 313 c638W, when he expects to receive details of the costs and the liability in respect of the damage to the tail shaft bearings of HMS `Ocean'; and if the (a) costs and (b)...

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Ministry of Defence

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

29 June 1998

Reference

47074; 315 c12W

House

House of Commons

Ministry of Defence

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his Answer of 11th June 1998, 313 c638W, what assessment his Department has made of the cause of the damage to HMS `Ocean' on her launch in October 1995; and what changes to operating arrangements have been made as a...

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Ministry of Defence

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

29 June 1998

Reference

47063; 315 c12W

House

House of Commons

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher