I wouldn't be adverse to some sort of an agreement wherein a consultant's liability was limited only to the maximum of their insurance, if we could get some assurance we couldn't be named as a 3rd party in some lawyer's future lawsuit. In the projects completed thus far in my career, the only lawsuits have been as a 3rd party. In other words, somebody else on the project team screwed up, but a lawyer will throw up mud on everybody and see who it sticks to. So although we did nothing wrong, we get to spend thousands of dollars on legal bills and lost professional time. Is that fair?

As with any agreement for professional services, the client should beware of the contract language. In addition to the limited liability clause discussed by Dianne, make sure you also get proof of the consultant's insurance. Many one-man-band consultants have no insurance at all.

1) Over twenty years ago, the legal profession began to inform property owners about the potential liabilities associated with environmentally contaminated property. Some law firms did good business, helpfully assisting owners pursue polluters – as well as pursuing consultants that had provided advice on contaminated land.

2) Subsequently, lawyers began narrating lawsuit horror stories to environmental consultants, describing their successful prosecutions.

3) The effect of this information was additional business for the legal community, as consulting firms with sufficient finances hired lawyers to assist in writing protective Terms & Conditions.

4) By 2009, most consultants likely have some form of Terms & Conditions in place and the market for that work has dried to a trickle. The wheel has turned, and we now see advice to property owners once again, this time suggesting that they be wary of those Terms – presumably legal advice is available to assist in interpretation and negotiation of better conditions!

It's a little reminiscent of a time in the early twentieth century when news agencies not only reported on the news, but actually assisted in making the news…

Of course, I know that you're referring to egregious and unfair Terms, and no, I don't really believe in conspiracy theories. Thanks for the enjoyable read!

Doug Ritcey