Any insurance recommendations (NOT Y Insurance)

[Chris_Robb]

As I've said before, what Chris is describing as a "special contract" is the standard Topsail policy and is based on an agreed value and does not allow them to fob you off with a similar boat. I even had Topsail confirm this and posted their reply verbatim here over the weekend.

Pete - agreed - I spoke to N&G and got confirmation that they do have a Binder on this, in the form of the Topsail wording.
BUT - see comments about a later clause on the same page above. I have only just realized its significance.

 

[DavidJ]

Thanks Chris for your trouble in locating the important phrase. My quick scanning failed again.

 

[alt]

Interested in this as my renewal (Y) will be up in April.

I'm based in West of Ireland and my type of boat isin't exactly popular / common over here.

I can see asking prices of my same model boat in Italy / Med for €75k. But by the time I get it back home and make modifications (that I have done), it's easily €100k.

What do I value my boat at?

 

[jrudge]

It is worth what someone will pay for it. Spending 25k does not necessarily add 25k to its value.

I am with Y and I am insured for more than I paid for it. I wrote to them detailing what was spent and what I believe a fair market value was ( the spend figure in total is over £100k so I was not keen to leave the insured value as was). They accepted what I wrote.

If I were you I would do the same. Bought for X, spent Y the boat is now worth Z. Z may or may not be X + Y

 

[alt]

I appreciate that completely, my concern is that, say for example, there's the same model / year in Italy for 75k, but to get that to West of Ireland could end up at 90k. I was allowing the other 10k as that was what was spent to code the boat (commercial... she's insured for commercial work).

All these figures are academic for easy maths.

I am NOT including canopy upgrades etc.

I'll be sure to get in touch when my renewal comes in, for peace of mind.

 

[petem]

David - its on page 4 - I have cut and pasted it below:
Important information
Taking care of Your vessel
Remember that your policy is not a maintenance contract.
It is up to you to ensure that all measures are taken to
maintain your vessel and machinery.
Important Notice
The amount we have insured your vessel for is the agreed
value of the vessel.
If the information you have provided about the value of the
vessel (including the price you bought it for) is false your
insurance cover may not be valid and we may refuse to pay
your claim.
The terms of your policy and premium are based on the
information you have provided to us. You must ensure that
all facts given are correct and you must contact us
immediately if there are any changes to the information you
have provided or at any time you discover that the
information is incorrect.
Examples include, but are not limited to:
• changes in the condition, market value or use of the
vessel;
• criminal charges or convictions of any person having an
interest in the vessel; and
• change in the mooring location or type of mooring for
the vessel.
A failure to provide full and accurate information may
invalidate your policy and may result in all or part of a claim
not being paid. If you are in any doubt please contact us.

I also highlighted the clauses where you have to inform them of a change - I did not see the ref to Market Value here, which troubles me when the chips are down..... Any thoughts Pete? My own feeling is that - if the market dived - as some predict the european market may do - then you have to inform them of the change. Now I am not certain that I can comply with that as it conflicts with the Agreed Value terms.

My view is that it would be sufficient to check the market value of the boat at renewal time. It would not be reasonable for an insurer to expect an owner to constantly monitor the market value of his boat. I'm not concerned by this clause at all.

 

[jrudge]

I appreciate that completely, my concern is that, say for example, there's the same model / year in Italy for 75k, but to get that to West of Ireland could end up at 90k. I was allowing the other 10k as that was what was spent to code the boat (commercial... she's insured for commercial work).

All these figures are academic for easy maths.

I am NOT including canopy upgrades etc.

I'll be sure to get in touch when my renewal comes in, for peace of mind.

Insurance is supposed to put you in the position you were pre incident. Not better or worse.

As such a boat in Italy is no use to you. You would roughly want a coded boat in Ireland of similar spec - and that would drive the value. if one were not available locally then transport and coding would seem entirely reasonable. In practice they may say we appreciate a Cranchi is not available, but there are plenty of similar boats for x. It would depend on the scale of transport fees I suspect ( and VAT now)

 

[Chris_Robb]

Insurance is supposed to put you in the position you were pre incident. Not better or worse.

As such a boat in Italy is no use to you. You would roughly want a coded boat in Ireland of similar spec - and that would drive the value. if one were not available locally then transport and coding would seem entirely reasonable. In practice they may say we appreciate a Cranchi is not available, but there are plenty of similar boats for x. It would depend on the scale of transport fees I suspect ( and VAT now)

You mention VAT! I regard my boat as of today (in Greece) as having both UK and EU Vat paid...... So if I was given a replacement boat, I would have to choose one or the other I presume. The benefits of dual vat status is an impossible conundrum!

 

[jrudge]

You will only have dual VAT for a while and then loose returned goods relief.

 

[Chris_Robb]

You will only have dual VAT for a while and then loose returned goods relief.

And why will I loose RGR? Its open to me under special circumstances (now known as Exceptional circumstances) on return to the uk, (In writing from HMRC) And if I sailed to Turkey and came back 3 years later - I can claim the 3 years exemption under RGR and return - It's only after 3 years that its gets Murky in that as non residents you may not be able to claim special circumstances (as it is stilled called in EU). This is clearly written in a response from the EU Commission that I had.

 

[jrudge]

As you say it expires after 3 years as long as you were the original exporter.

The exceptional circumstances listed are

We may also be able to waive requirement that the goods must be returned to the UK no more than 3 years after the date of export in special or exceptional circumstances such as:

• specialised goods returning to the UK from long-term hire or loan agreements outside the UK
• building equipment or machinery returning to the UK after use in capital projects outside the UK
• exhibition goods returning after long-term display or storage outside the UK
• collectors’ or heritage items originally manufactured in the UK and returning from overseas after re-acquisition by a UK dealer or investor, for example collectable items of furniture or ceramics
• professional and personal effects returning with returning UK expatriates Contact the National Import Reliefs Unit for more information on these special circumstances.

I cant see a boat fitting any of those unless you are a returning ex pat

 

[gordmac]

Insurance is supposed to put you in the position you were pre incident. Not better or worse.

As such a boat in Italy is no use to you. You would roughly want a coded boat in Ireland of similar spec - and that would drive the value. if one were not available locally then transport and coding would seem entirely reasonable. In practice they may say we appreciate a Cranchi is not available, but there are plenty of similar boats for x. It would depend on the scale of transport fees I suspect ( and VAT now)

Ireland is in the EU so no vat.

 

[Chris_Robb]

As you say it expires after 3 years as long as you were the original exporter.

The exceptional circumstances listed are

We may also be able to waive requirement that the goods must be returned to the UK no more than 3 years after the date of export in special or exceptional circumstances such as:

• specialised goods returning to the UK from long-term hire or loan agreements outside the UK
• building equipment or machinery returning to the UK after use in capital projects outside the UK
• exhibition goods returning after long-term display or storage outside the UK
• collectors’ or heritage items originally manufactured in the UK and returning from overseas after re-acquisition by a UK dealer or investor, for example collectable items of furniture or ceramics
• professional and personal effects returning with returning UK expatriates Contact the National Import Reliefs Unit for more information on these special circumstances.

I cant see a boat fitting any of those unless you are a returning ex pat

This has been used for the last 30 years. It does not need to be in the list as it is headed Such as - why would they change it from how its always operated for the last 30 years or so? Answer from the revenue - it has not changed. I think the RYA forgot what was the most important provision used by us over the years - "special Circumstances", so there was much of a hu ha about nothing....

 

[jrudge]

And what where the circumstance they agreed to ?

 

[Hurricane]

David - its on page 4 - I have cut and pasted it below:
Important information
Taking care of Your vessel
Remember that your policy is not a maintenance contract.
It is up to you to ensure that all measures are taken to
maintain your vessel and machinery.
Important Notice
The amount we have insured your vessel for is the agreed
value of the vessel.
If the information you have provided about the value of the
vessel (including the price you bought it for) is false your
insurance cover may not be valid and we may refuse to pay
your claim.
The terms of your policy and premium are based on the
information you have provided to us. You must ensure that
all facts given are correct and you must contact us
immediately if there are any changes to the information you
have provided or at any time you discover that the
information is incorrect.
Examples include, but are not limited to:
• changes in the condition, market value or use of the
vessel;
• criminal charges or convictions of any person having an
interest in the vessel; and
• change in the mooring location or type of mooring for
the vessel.
A failure to provide full and accurate information may
invalidate your policy and may result in all or part of a claim
not being paid. If you are in any doubt please contact us.

I also highlighted the clauses where you have to inform them of a change - I did not see the ref to Market Value here, which troubles me when the chips are down..... Any thoughts Pete? My own feeling is that - if the market dived - as some predict the european market may do - then you hav eto inform them of the change. Now I am not certain that I can comply with that as it conflicts with the Agreed Value terms.

Right - thanks Chris - I think we might be getting somewhere now.
My requirement (and I think a lot of others on this forum's requirements) are:-
An All Risks Policy with exclusions (I just prefer the policy that way round) rather than a policy stating what is covered.
and an Agreed Value Policy.

My thinking is mainly looking at a total loss scenario.
In a total loss, I would expect to receive the Agreed Value.
I don't make claims but I guess that most claims aren't "Total Losses" so I think that the Agreed Value is somewhat meaningless.

My point is the same as Chris wrote earlier in this thread.
Chris said that he has done a lot of work, personally, to his boat that he probably wouldn't want to do again with a replacement boat.
And he wants that value covered.
Most people on this forum will know that I have done much the same but maybe on a bigger scale.
For example replacing teak decks with synthetic cost me far far less than having them replaced commercially.
But in the event of a total loss I would want the replacement boat to have all the work done.

When I renewed with Y last year, I reviewed the second hand market for similar models of our boat.
I then added for the extra equipment/features that is fitted to our boat that wouldn't be fitted to the boats that I found on the second hand market.
And that was the Agreed Value that I agreed with Y.

On the subject of sea cocks, I have a procedure where once a year, I check and photographically document the boat;s sea cocks, shaft seals and fire extinguishers. Usually, I do the check in February but this year it will, obviously, be delayed. A few years ago, I documented this procedure and sent a copy to Y. On top of this, the boat gets the usual annual maintenance lift during which photographs are taken.

It would be interesting to hear Chris' view on this post.

 

[Chris_Robb]

And what where the circumstance they agreed to ?

Any yacht that came into the UK from a long term abroad, in excess of 3 years,was meant to claim RGR. In practice only yachts on the deck of a ship did it. Tge customs agents would submit forms claiming this and the owned fillef in forms, answering 3 main question:- were they the exporter, no significant improvements, and no duty claimed back. This was written on a form and submitted for waiver of the 3 years term. Job done. Bad eggs would be refused.

Yachts on their own bottoms applied by flying the yellow flag, and just had to declare no booze Dec.

So it worked this way for years.

 

[Chris_Robb]

Right - thanks Chris - I think we might be getting somewhere now.
My requirement (and I think a lot of others on this forum's requirements) are:-
An All Risks Policy with exclusions (I just prefer the policy that way round) rather than a policy stating what is covered.
and an Agreed Value Policy.

My thinking is mainly looking at a total loss scenario.
In a total loss, I would expect to receive the Agreed Value.
I don't make claims but I guess that most claims aren't "Total Losses" so I think that the Agreed Value is somewhat meaningless.

My point is the same as Chris wrote earlier in this thread.
Chris said that he has done a lot of work, personally, to his boat that he probably wouldn't want to do again with a replacement boat.
And he wants that value covered.
Most people on this forum will know that I have done much the same but maybe on a bigger scale.
For example replacing teak decks with synthetic cost me far far less than having them replaced commercially.
But in the event of a total loss I would want the replacement boat to have all the work done.

When I renewed with Y last year, I reviewed the second hand market for similar models of our boat.
I then added for the extra equipment/features that is fitted to our boat that wouldn't be fitted to the boats that I found on the second hand market.
And that was the Agreed Value that I agreed with Y.

On the subject of sea cocks, I have a procedure where once a year, I check and photographically document the boat;s sea cocks, shaft seals and fire extinguishers. Usually, I do the check in February but this year it will, obviously, be delayed. A few years ago, I documented this procedure and sent a copy to Y. On top of this, the boat gets the usual annual maintenance lift during which photographs are taken.

It would be interesting to hear Chris' view on this post.

I totally agree with you, and that owners should have a comprehensive seacock inspection plan, documented and submitted along with a schedule of works and checks each year , so that the owner can prove maintenance.

You really don't want to be on down side of a total constructive loss without proof. Insurance companies will not be cudley in these circumstances.... it's business.....

 

[petem]

My thinking is mainly looking at a total loss scenario.
In a total loss, I would expect to receive the Agreed Value.
I don't make claims but I guess that most claims aren't "Total Losses" so I think that the Agreed Value is somewhat meaningless.

Mike, you seem to be contradicting yourself here.

Topsail have a standard limit on the sum assured based on the price paid for the boat. In our case we bought our boat when the market was weak, with a few things that needed fixing and from a somewhat distressed seller. Subsequently we have fixed the boat, added A/C and moved it to the Med. to us, it's worth probably 25% more than we paid for it.

I discussed this with them and they didn't see an issue with honouring the higher sum assured that we had agreed with 'Y'.

What they don't want to do is create a situation where policy holders have a financial incentive to scuttle their boats for a profit.

 

[Chris_Robb]

Mike, you seem to be contradicting yourself here.

Topsail have a standard limit on the sum assured based on the price paid for the boat. In our case we bought our boat when the market was weak, with a few things that needed fixing and from a somewhat distressed seller. Subsequently we have fixed the boat, added A/C and moved it to the Med. to us, it's worth probably 25% more than we paid for it.

I discussed this with them and they didn't see an issue with honouring the higher sum assured that we had agreed with 'Y'.

What they don't want to do is create a situation where policy holders have a financial incentive to scuttle their boats for a profit.

Peter, I have copied the relevant clauses from the Topsail N&G contract and N&G own contract. First Topsails:
Topsail
The amount we have insured your vessel for is the agreed

value of the vessel.

If the information you have provided about the value of the

vessel (including the price you bought it for) is false your

insurance cover may not be valid and we may refuse to pay

your claim.

The terms of your policy and premium are based on the

information you have provided to us. You must ensure that

all facts given are correct and you must contact us

immediately if there are any changes to the information you

have provided or at any time you discover that the

information is incorrect.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

• changes in the condition, market value or use of the

vessel;

Nav And Gen - Direct

• In the event of a total loss, we will
either pay the agreed value of the
vessel or, where you have declared
a sum insured which is greater than
30% the current market price for
the vessel, we shall have the right
to replace the vessel. Replacement is
deemed adequate if it is of a similar age,
size and type even if its appearance
and condition is not the same as the
vessel’s prior to the incident.
With the exception of a claim where the
Replacement Vessel endorsement applies,
in no event shall the total of all payments
exceed the sum insured for the
insured property

And this bit about a replacement yacht



n Replacement Vessel – RPV

If a total loss occurs we will pay for a

new craft of the same make, model,

specification and tax/fiscal status or if

the craft is no longer in production, a

new craft of an equivalent model,

specification and tax/fiscal status.

The maximum we will pay under this

endorsement is 105% of the sum

insured of the vessel.

Craftinsure - I have not clipped this one, but it says

"Agreed Value or a replacement with a similar yacht"

Now this is very confusing as when I first started this search and looked up N&G contract online - I saw this phrase, which was the reason (along with the then Very Bad corrosion clause) so it stuck in my mind. I know cannot find it anywhere on N&G site.

Having contemplated long and hard - my conclusion is that N&G direct policy offers a great dealt of certainty, so needed in a contract. I see this as remarkably sensible and the get out clause for them on my 30 year old Westerly is to replace it with a new but similar boat if mine does not exist in the market place second hand.

This is clear and concise. When could this go wrong - well this Covid thingy could completely collapse the market leaving a lot of distressed sellers - In fact some brokers are already talking about the collapse of the EU Yachts Market - which I hope does not happen. God knows how you word a sensible contract for that.

In terms of Topsails - yes it (sort of) is. But the last clause highlighted completely contradicts this by saying - you have to keep checking and disclosing what the market value is at any time - and that if you don't disclose it, they might not pay the claim.

I do believe that the intension is only to use such a clause when there is nautiness - however as someone once said "What is Written is Written". And dont assume they may not use it in very tough commercial times......

 

[petem]

Chris, I know what he policies say and I'm struggling to see your point.