Advice problems after boat sank

[durza]

Sadly my boat sank in a storm a few weeks ago after being struck by an old steel Nato pontoon it stoved the swim platform through the stern and parted all the lines so i went down slowly hanging on the forward spring and bow line the worst part is im with basic boat insurance and they don't want to know at all or help, so need some advice now as i think im going to have to take it to small claims court for the cost of the boat. The pontoon that struck it was owned by the harbour i moor with and i tried to get a surveyor but its impossible to get someone impartial as they have all done work for the harbour itself. the boat was salvaged at the harbours request and put on a semi drying finger pontoon to make it safe but in a second storm it went down again and went from a usable project boat to a total loss while waiting for there loss adjusters to come see it.

Anyone dealt with something like this before i feel totally screwed over, lost and overwhelmed to be honest

 

[Tranona]

Sounds like you only have third party insurance. If you have "All Risks" cover then you can claim on your policy. You need to read your policy to see what is actually covered. if you are not insured for damage to your own boat you can try and claim from the third party (owner of the pontoon) but you will have to show that they were negligent. This is often very difficult and you may end up dealing with their insurer.

 

[durza]

Sounds like you only have third party insurance. If you have "All Risks" cover then you can claim on your policy. You need to read your policy to see what is actually covered. if you are not insured for damage to your own boat you can try and claim from the third party (owner of the pontoon) but you will have to show that they were negligent. This is often very difficult and you may end up dealing with their insurer.

Thanks for they reply yes i think i will have to claim on their insurance through small claims, I'm not sure i would have to prove negligence, If was my boat that broke lines and smashed another boat im sure they would come after me even if i wasn't negligent.

And at worst if i do have to other then knowing they never replace the lines they used to tie it up, they never checked it or had it on a monthly check like they do with all the boats and they let a mooring holder borrow it and tie it up with ought supervision, they also never even made sure it was secure before the storm which is why the lines let go im sure i have pictures of them.

 

[bedouin]

Have you spoken with the harbour about the issue? What did they say? Do they have an complaints procedure? Make sure you follow all such routes before resorting to legal action.

Actually proving negligence could be tricky - just because their pontoon sank your boat is not enough to win you would need to prove (for example) that the pontoon was not adequately secured before the storm and that they should have known that.

However it is not difficult to start a claim in the small claims court (I believe you can do it on line) and the act of doing so may make them more reasonable.

 

[Daydream believer]

Bit late now, but it shows how silly it is to try to save what amounts to a pretty insignificant saving on insurance cost .

 

[Irish Rover]

Bit late now, but it shows how silly it is to try to save what amounts to a pretty insignificant saving on insurance cost .

Lovely bedside manner

 

[Tranona]

Thanks for they reply yes i think i will have to claim on their insurance through small claims, I'm not sure i would have to prove negligence, If was my boat that broke lines and smashed another boat im sure they would come after me even if i wasn't negligent.

And at worst if i do have to other then knowing they never replace the lines they used to tie it up, they never checked it or had it on a monthly check like they do with all the boats and they let a mooring holder borrow it and tie it up with ought supervision, they also never even made sure it was secure before the storm which is why the lines let go im sure i have pictures of them.

The procedure is to make a claim on the owner of the pontoon. That is who is responsible. They will almost certainly pass it on to their insurers. Vital that you do have evidence they were negligent - see here for the principles underlying negligence lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/guidance/negligence-key-elements-to-establish-a-negligence-claim What you have described is the sort of evidence you need to show they have breached their duty of care. However you first have to show that they owed you a duty of care, then there was a breach that was avoidable and the consequent harm to you or your property.

Suggest you submit a claim showing that the pontoon caused the damage to your boat and an estimate for the repair, or the value of the boat if a repair is not viable. Suspect your claim will be rejected citing "Act of God" - the storm was unforeseeable or worse than normal which is why you need your evidence that their preparations were inadequate to cope with the expected weather. (mooring lines inadequate, not regularly checked, inappropriate use etc.). Going to court at this point is not the correct procedure - you have to give the other party every opportunity to make good the damage. Going to court is a last resort as the court is there to resolve the dispute. You are expected to use "normal" procedures first.

 

[Daydream believer]

Lovely bedside manner

I love you too, But I won't go to bed with you, Even if you do pay for the beer & the fish supper
Well not on the first date anyway

 

[Tranona]

Bit late now, but it shows how silly it is to try to save what amounts to a pretty insignificant saving on insurance cost .

Did you read that it is a "project" boat? - Often difficult to get all risks on such boats at any price.

 

[Irish Rover]

I love you too, But I won't go to bed with you, Even if you do pay for the beer & the fish supper
Well not on the first date anyway

 

[KevinV]

I'd go a bit carefully unless you are 110% you, with no legal insurance, can prove and fight a negligence claim. Expect a flat denial of liability, and possibly a counterclaim for the salvage costs, storage, etc.

Softly, softly - better to stay in "poor me, can you please help?" mode, rather than becoming litigious too soon.

You talk about small claims - what sort of value are we talking about?

 

[Boathook]

Did you read that it is a "project" boat? - Often difficult to get all risks on such boats at any price.

The OP did say a useable project boat but not why it is a project.

 

[nathanglasgow]

Basic boat insurance policy is just that,basic. It's 3rd party with wreck removal costs being covered. It's why our boat is insured with them,a 1973 Dufour Arpege,so practically worthless . The benefit of Basic Boat policy is that no survey is required. We're only worried about our liability to others and wreck removal costs and are quite happy to swallow the costs if the worst happens. If how ever we owned a 40 grand boat and not a 4 grand one then yes it would be fully insured. Daughter is a Lloyds Naval Architect in their survey dept so I guess that may help a wee bit with maintaining the auld heap in a vagually seaworthy manner

 

[Mark-1]

Basic boat insurance policy is just that,basic. It's 3rd party with wreck removal costs being covered. It's why our boat is insured with them,a 1973 Dufour Arpege,so practically worthless . The benefit of Basic Boat policy is that no survey is required. We're only worried about our liability to others and wreck removal costs and are quite happy to swallow the costs if the worst happens. If how ever we owned a 40 grand boat and not a 4 grand one then yes it would be fully insured. Daughter is a Lloyds Naval Architect in their survey dept so I guess that may help a wee bit with maintaining the auld heap in a vagually seaworthy manner

Yeah.

I'm surprised that the OP seems to be grumbling that they aren't interested. Why would they be?

Unless they're refusing to pay out on the wreck recovery which, as a BB customer, I would be concerned out.

 

[durza]

Have you spoken with the harbour about the issue? What did they say? Do they have an complaints procedure? Make sure you follow all such routes before resorting to legal action.

Actually proving negligence could be tricky - just because their pontoon sank your boat is not enough to win you would need to prove (for example) that the pontoon was not adequately secured before the storm and that they should have known that.

However it is not difficult to start a claim in the small claims court (I believe you can do it on line) and the act of doing so may make them more reasonable.

yes i was with the harbour master when we went to inspect the boat so she was fully aware and even said it was probably their pontoon that sunk it in the week that followed its sinking i phone my insurance and i did complain to the harbour this was followed by a letter and then another letter when i received no reply then on the 16th i sent one more letter asking for some sort of meeting to meditate this issue before i put in court paperwork on the 26th its poor timing around the holidays but iv tried to be reasonable and they are simply just fobbing it off onto the insurance and they have made no contact with my as of yet.

 

[Daydream believer]

yes i was with the harbour master when we went to inspect the boat so she was fully aware and even said it was probably their pontoon that sunk it in the week that followed its sinking i phone my insurance and i did complain to the harbour this was followed by a letter and then another letter when i received no reply then on the 16th i sent one more letter asking for some sort of meeting to meditate this issue before i put in court paperwork on the 26th its poor timing around the holidays but iv tried to be reasonable and they are simply just fobbing it off onto the insurance and they have made no contact with my as of yet.

If I was them I would say nothing.
Perhaps, " We thank you for & and acknowledge receipt of your letter of XXX"--Regards
To keep it polite
Then pass it to the company insurers to deal with. It is up to the insurers to decide on what action to take on behalf of the marina owners.

 

[durza]

If I was them I would say nothing.
Perhaps, " We thank you for & and acknowledge receipt of your letter of XXX"--Regards
To keep it polite
Then pass it to the company insurers to deal with. It is up to the insurers to decide on what action to take on behalf of the marina owners.

iv been assured verbally by the harbour master they have been passed on to their insurance but iv not heard a peep

 

[durza]

I'd go a bit carefully unless you are 110% you, with no legal insurance, can prove and fight a negligence claim. Expect a flat denial of liability, and possibly a counterclaim for the salvage costs, storage, etc.

Softly, softly - better to stay in "poor me, can you please help?" mode, rather than becoming litigious too soon.

You talk about small claims - what sort of value are we talking about?

Around the 26k mark iv been very understanding and slow with the process until my final letter of mediation on the 16th with the intent to take them to court if they don't try and make some effort of a meeting iv literally had 0 contact of even acknowledgement in writing from the harbour directors or their insurance and the harbour master cant or wont talk to me about it.

 

[Daydream believer]

If it is proved that you dragged their pontoon under. Can you bear the cost & court fees?
Could go that way with a decent KC on the other side.

 

[nathanglasgow]

At a vessel value of 26 grand I'd have thought 3rd party only insurance would be a bit of a gamble.