3rd Party Damages My Yacht Why Claim On My Insurance?

[dewent]

Got an email from my marina saying that the mast on a very poorly maintained yacht next to mine had collapsed in high winds and fallen onto our yacht. Despite suggesting damage was only minor, when I inspected a few days later it transpired that the mast had badly damaged our Sprayhood and canopy (it needs a complete replacement), and bent back the stanchions and guard rails. All in about £3000 of damage. Despite initial suggestions from the marina that it would be covered on their insurance I am now being asked to make a claim on my insurers and it will be sorted out insurer to insurer. However I am worried that (a) I may lose my no claim bonus, and (b) I have a £1250 excess so will I get fully reimbursed?

Given that I am totally the innocent party does this seem a fair way to ask me to proceed?

Advice gratefully received.

Thanks all and Merry Christmas.

 

[sarabande]

It's likely that the terms of the marina include every boat being insured. Is that the case ?


You should make it clear to your insurers that you are No Fault, and this must be noted on your file.. I see no reason at all why you should fork out £1250. The other boat owner must be made to pay, unless of course he asked the marina to look after his boat in his absence....

 

[Sinbad1951]

Yes, the simplest and most straight forward way to claim is via the negligent 3rd party's insurers. This may well be the vessel owners and it may well be the marina as they have a duty of care towards all berth holders and allowing a vessel in poor condition to be in the marina may well make them liable.
So already there is a potential problem which would make this a difficult claim. The vessel insurers may state that the claim is the marinas responsibility and vice versa.
The best approach is to get the insurance details from the neighbouring boat owner and contact his insurers direct with his policy number. Ask your neighbour to immediately report the accident so that your claim and his accident report are tied together. Ask the 3rd party insurer to send a marine surveyor to assess the damage and approve repairs to your boat. (Get a couple of quotes to give to him).
Now this will go one of two ways. They will approve your repairs and matter done, or they will contest liability and say it was your fault as your boat had jumped up and hit his mast!
This will be totally dependent upon which Insurer he is with. If they are of poor quality they will dispute it as they do all claims. Your only choice then is to go through your own insurers who will pay your repairs and attempt to recover the loss/cost through the other negligent party.
If you are really lucky they may well include your excess payment as part of their own recovery claim...sillier things have happened.
Good luck!

 

[bedouin]

You should make it clear to your insurers that you are No Fault, and this must be noted on your file.. I see no reason at all why you should fork out £1250. The other boat owner must be made to pay, ...

It is not necessarily that simple - you will have to prove that the other boat owner is liable. That means that you have to show that the owner should have foreseen that the mast would fall and could cause damage. That might not be that easy.

 

[prv]

You probably do have to notify your insurers. At the same time you can ask them whether you should also be claiming, but it doesn't seem to me that you should. The person responsible for the other boat owes you for the repair work regardless of any insurance situation, it's simple tort liability for dropping a mast on you, but if insured they will be claiming on their insurer to cover that cost.

EDIT: Bedouin is right to point out that they're liable in tort only if they ought to have forseen the mast falling down and causing damage, I was a bit simplistic there.

Pete

 

[charles_reed]

I'm sorry to hear of your misfortune.
From past experience it's always a good idea to inform your insurers if any damage has occured to the boat.
It is invariably politic to not try and lay blame but I would ensure you have all the details of your marina insurance and the 3rd party whose boat caused the damage.
In the worst case, if neither the 3rd party or marina insurance are adequate to cover what has happened, you'll have the repairs done, covered by your own insurance and should avoid your excess.
It is likely that your no-claims bonus, unless protected, will be lost.
Most probably your insurers will cover the damage and reclaim it all off the other parties - don't try and do their job...

 

[macd]

Agree that you should inform your insurer of the damage, regardless of any claim you might make. I'd do it by e-mail, but perhaps your insurer is less accessible than mine.

A worthwhile point re excess: with my cover my excess is reduced to zero whilst the vessel is in its "designated winter berth". Perhaps yours is the same? If so, if things go pear-shaped, this may reduce the cost to you. Obviously it wouldn't help with loss of no-claims discount, though.

 

[Seajet]

Take lots of photo's of the damage, including everything on the boat & mast which caused it, detail shots of the bits which failed if poss.

 

[robertj]

i had nearly the same problem when i had no fault damage to my boat. My insurance dealt with it but did in fact informed me that the excess would be take from the settlement. I queried this to be told, if it was viable for them to pursue the other party legally then it would be refunded.
I informed them that its a no fault claim on my behalf and if they didnt want to pursue it then thats their hard luck which had nothing to do with my contract.
outcome they didnt take the excess.

 

[GrahamM376]

We've been hit twice on moorings and it's much simpler to claim via your own insurers than trying to argue with 3rd party insurers and if you have the legal expenses add-on, they (in our case) repaid the excess. We didn't lose NCB as we were on our home berth/mooring.

 

[Iliade]

I have had four no-fault incidents to my car in the last six years. I've taken to using a claims management company to deal with the offending party's insurers. It certainly makes them sit up and take notice :0)

 

[JumbleDuck]

It is not necessarily that simple - you will have to prove that the other boat owner is liable. That means that you have to show that the owner should have foreseen that the mast would fall and could cause damage.

Am I really not liable if I could not foresee the event which caused the damage? "Sorry, guv, I had no idea that gust would come / that mooring line would break / that burst of astern wouldn't work, so I'm not liable. Have a nice day."

I'd have thought it far more likely that my insurers would cover me for the unforeseeable and refuse to cough up for the obviously predictable.

 

[bedouin]

Am I really not liable if I could not foresee the event which caused the damage? "Sorry, guv, I had no idea that gust would come / that mooring line would break / that burst of astern wouldn't work, so I'm not liable. Have a nice day."

I'd have thought it far more likely that my insurers would cover me for the unforeseeable and refuse to cough up for the obviously predictable.

Your insurance covers your liability to 3rd parties.

We live in a blame culture these days - but accidents do happen for which no one is to blame.

In this case you have to know what caused the mast to break before you can determine who, if anyone, is liable. For the boat owner will only be liable if he ought to have known there was a risk of the mast falling down - in other words there was a defect that he should have been able to detect with reasonable skill/care.

If the other boat owner was not liable then why should his insurance pay?

 

[PetiteFleur]

The boat from an adjacent mooring hit my boat whilst he was manouvering. The owner phoned me that evening and said he would get the damage repaired - he got my number from the boatyard. Repaired over winter by the yard and I'm happy. I did not inform my insurer as I did not think it necessary. (It was not serious damage)

 

[JumbleDuck]

For the boat owner will only be liable if he ought to have known there was a risk of the mast falling down - in other words there was a defect that he should have been able to detect with reasonable skill/care.

I don't believe that, sorry. Those are the circumstances under which insurance might refuse to pay out; the owner is liable whether it was unforeseeable, foreseeable or wholly deliberate. You don't have to be negligent to be liable.

 

[bedouin]

I don't believe that, sorry. Those are the circumstances under which insurance might refuse to pay out; the owner is liable whether it was unforeseeable, foreseeable or wholly deliberate. You don't have to be negligent to be liable.

Sorry - I can't help what you believe - I am stating the legal position

 

[Jamesuk]

It's likely that the terms of the marina include every boat being insured. Is that the case ?


You should make it clear to your insurers that you are No Fault, and this must be noted on your file.. I see no reason at all why you should fork out £1250. The other boat owner must be made to pay, unless of course he asked the marina to look after his boat in his absence....

Does it not fall under the same rules as 'act of god'. If anything the marina should be working with the other yacht and make a claim on that policy to cover damage to their yacht and anything else.

Don't go calling a lawyer, give your insurance company a call and see what happens.

 

[GrahamM376]

I don't believe that, sorry. Those are the circumstances under which insurance might refuse to pay out; the owner is liable whether it was unforeseeable, foreseeable or wholly deliberate. You don't have to be negligent to be liable.

He may well be right. A mooring dragged near ours and the boat hit another causing damage. Insurers deemed it an act of god as the owner didn't know it was likely to happen. (lying ba****d had dragged before but no-one could prove it) Decision later upheld by tribunal.

OTOH, there may well be a clause in the OP's marina agreement that boats must be properly maintained and safe so, he could be negligent in not carrying out maintenance, particularly if he was aware of the state.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Sorry - I can't help what you believe - I am stating the legal position

I still don't believe you. It's well established that insurers can refuse to pay out for anything which might have reasonably been foreseen. Now you say that they don't need to pay out for things which haven't been foreseen. What, in that case, is the point of having insurance at all?

 

[Stork_III]

Agree that you should inform your insurer of the damage, regardless of any claim you might make. I'd do it by e-mail, but perhaps your insurer is less accessible than mine.

A worthwhile point re excess: with my cover my excess is reduced to zero whilst the vessel is in its "designated winter berth". Perhaps yours is the same? If so, if things go pear-shaped, this may reduce the cost to you. Obviously it wouldn't help with loss of no-claims discount, though.

If you insure with Y Yacht they say " No loss of excess or No claim bonus for loss or damage to the vessel when berthed on a pontoon or ashore in a marina"

Does your insurer have similar?