Betterment?

I have just picked up on this thread and have every sympathy for the situation you find yourself in. I had to make an insurance claim this year when the boat was hit by another vessel on the mooring. Vessel buggered off and there were no witnesses. I thought there would be no problem insurance wise - bit of topside damage and broken rudder - simples!!!.....................Well no - you see repairing the topsides (painting) was betterment apparantly!?! Huge arguement, 8 months later we have settled in my favour. When it comes to insurance, the companies assume that a certain proportion of claimants won't challenge their assessment. You have to insist on them returning your boat to pre accident condition. If that means they have to replace the old mast with a new one so be it. You can only substantiate betterment if the mast is replaced with a more expensive, technically superior one ie carbon fibre. Before the damage you had a mast and boom in working order - the boat should be returned in that state. You will encounter a lot of resistance from the insurers. Be prepared for threats, insults, the works. If you have to go to the insurance ombudsman then do it, the result is legally binding for them but not for you. Due to the economic downturn, I think that 'betterment' is being used too liberally by the insurance companies these days. You are not looking for new for old - just reinstatement of the boat - if that means a new mast, not your fault!!! Ask them for an older mast to avoid the betterment and see what they say!!!! Do not settle for 30% betterment. They are trying to rip you off!!. Incidentally, this is becoming more widespread in the marine market and is maybe something we should all do something about collectively!!
 
Top