CabanSail ɹoʇɐɹǝpoɯ ʎɹobǝʇɐɔ
#16

I am assuming that you checked that they were fully insured, including Professional Indemnity Insurance?

It does seem unprofessional to have aerial photography included in the contract and only have one aircraft. A professional outfit would have redundancy.

magicbastarder Moderator
#17

i'm pondering how you could leverage the cash-only aspect. could be used against them, a subtle suggestion that the revenue commissioners may learn of the practice.

Bacchus Registered User
#18

CabanSail said:
I am assuming that you checked that they were fully insured, including Professional Indemnity Insurance?

It does seem unprofessional to have aerial photography included in the contract and only have one aircraft. A professional outfit would have redundancy.


Or at least be able to get a loan/rental on short notice. As you say, very unprofessional.

Their website claims they are fully insured and have Professional Indemnity Insurance.

magicbastarder said:
i'm pondering how you could leverage the cash-only aspect. could be used against them, a subtle suggestion that the revenue commissioners may learn of the practice.


Was thinking the same too... it's a murky area though. Also, they could get around such an accusation with ease since 2018 tax returns won't have been filed yet and therefore they can just say OF COURSE they were going to declare it. Better off keeping your nose clean and going about it the right way. Pity about the €2k limit with the SCC.

1 person has thanked this post

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!