Boat Insurance alternatives to GJW

nicho said:
My claims experience with GJW concurs. Wouldn't use anyone else.
Click to expand...

I have also had good experience with GJW, however reading JFM's insurance post I'm not sure I'd go with them again. My claim from GJW was dealt with well, and quickly, but I have to say it was for a relatively small amount.
 
So, everyone concurs that's GJW offer a quality service and that's not in question. It's the charges for that service that I wish to benchmark with equal or better service
 
oGaryo said:
You're presuming the desire is to retain the same premium as last year, that's not the case, I want to see a decrease in the premium
Click to expand...

Well I suppose you get what you pay for.

I'm sure for less cover you can get a lower premium.

Why not go the whole hog and save £318 by just not insuring - after all you dudnt claim last year.

£300 odd doesn't sound like much for a years fully comp insurance - how much cheaper do you expect it to be?
 
boat value

oGaryo said:
You're presuming the desire is to retain the same premium as last year, that's not the case, I want to see a decrease in the premium
Click to expand...

I mormally drop the value of the boat a couple of grand each year as its value would have dropped and yes it does make a difference. as for the service they provide, a few years back we had an incident in Le Havre, not our fault nobody hurt but they couldnt have been more helpfull, when we got back all was repaired very quickly and no hassle from them over cost or choice of repairer. hence i still insure both boats with them.
 
Jegs said:
I had the same problem with them, 5% NCD - still increased premium, then 10% NCD - same, 15% NCD.........

I found St Margarets, now Haven Knox Johnson, more reasonable.

John G
Click to expand...

I have said this before and I will say it again. Although HK-J have a generally good reputation, I had a memorably bad experience with them a few years back, and wouldn't use them again, even if they were the last insurer left on Earth.
 
jhr said:
I have said this before and I will say it again. Although HK-J have a generally good reputation, I had a memorably bad experience with them a few years back, and wouldn't use them again, even if they were the last insurer left on Earth.
Click to expand...
Would you mind elaborating a bit jhr? What loss/incident did they not pay out on?
 
mm1 said:
So is it just me. It appears to me that JFM has an axe to grind in this matter having had problems with a VERY big claim!
Click to expand...

mm1, how does having and winning a big fight with my house insurer (Royal Sun Alliance, who do not do boat insurance afaik) give me an axe to grind when I say on here that I recommend boat insurer A over insurer B?
 
experience counts

jfm said:
I don't but suppose I do. Why would that make me write that Pantaenius and HK-J are ok, but GJW and Bluefin aren't?
Click to expand...

Its not until you experience a claim with these companies just how each of them can differ in dealing with the claim speed etc , try reducing the value of your boat, as its not worth what it was last year thats for sure.
 
freddy the frog said:
Its not until you experience a claim with these companies just how each of them can differ in dealing with the claim speed etc , try reducing the value of your boat, as its not worth what it was last year thats for sure.
Click to expand...
With a sailing boat, if the rig goes over the side , that can be a considerable % of the insured value & if you keep dropping the insured value ( mine is agreed value ) you might well be under insured & the pay out reduced as a consequence, you then end up "self insuring" to save a few £s on the premium
 
Yes try reducing the value & reiterate the first aid certificate !. Also go with personal recommendations from people who have actual experience with claims with the company concerned.
MM1
 
Thanks everyone, I'll go back to GJW and ask that the value of the boat is considered along with my new quals and also make mention to the concern in the clause relating to sinking as a result of corrosions and electrolysis. I'll also get a comparative quote from your favoured insurers John
 
oGaryo said:
Thanks everyone, I'll go back to GJW and ask that the value of the boat is considered along with my new quals and also make mention to the concern in the clause relating to sinking as a result of corrosions and electrolysis. I'll also get a comparative quote from your favoured insurers John
Click to expand...
Gary, I don't have favoured insurers, only favoured clauses :). So does Seahope!
 
jfm said:
Gary, I don't have favoured insurers, only favoured clauses :). So does Seahope!
Click to expand...

thanks John I hear you :encouragement: I've asked for clarification from GJW what the consequences of the following clause would be if a seacock were to fail due to electrolysis, rust or corrosion resulting in the boat sinking or indeed, suffering any damage i.e. it doesn't sink but there's internal water damage

This Policy does not cover physical loss of or damage:
1. to the Vessel caused by:-
...
(iv) corrosion, rot, rust.....
(v) electrolysis;

I've also submitted a request for quote from Pantaenius Yacht Insurance for comparison so I can go with those guys quickly if GJW's response isn't favourable wrt the risk factor rather than financials
 
oGaryo said:
thanks John I hear you :encouragement: I've asked for clarification from GJW what the consequences of the following clause would be if a seacock were to fail due to electrolysis, rust or corrosion resulting in the boat sinking or indeed, suffering any damage i.e. it doesn't sink but there's internal water damage

This Policy does not cover physical loss of or damage:
1. to the Vessel caused by:-
...
(iv) corrosion, rot, rust.....
(v) electrolysis;

I've also submitted a request for quote from Pantaenius Yacht Insurance for comparison so I can go with those guys quickly if GJW's response isn't favourable wrt the risk factor rather than financials
Click to expand...

I would be interested to hear of their reply Gary. I was only speaking a couple of weeks ago to the chap who runs their out of hours claim line and who is their claims assessor. His opinion is that if a vessel should sink due to failure of a seacock, the liability to reinstate the boat would be met with the exception of the seacock itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top