A member was recently asked to sign a “Hold harmless” statement in return for getting paid outstanding fees.The proposition was that the consultant – undertaking design work instructed by the Main Contractor – was a “subcontractor”. The effect was that if ever the Main Contractor was faced with a claim which might be related to design – or the work carried out to or in relation to that design – the architect would fully indemnify the Main Contractor. Not only was this requirement not foreshadowed in the initial contract for engagement, but it would probably not come within the cover offered by PI insurers.Members should be on the lookout for such clauses, and not action them without first obtaining specific legal and expert insurance advice.