Boat insurance

I've liked dealing with GJW, and they've paid claims (albeit smallish ones) that they could have argued, so rather than change insurer I asked them to change the clause. They first offered a reassurance of how they would interpret the corrosion clause, which I rejected, and they've now promised to send something in writing which makes it contractual.

I'll post on here when I receive it.
 
In the process of buying a new boat. GJW say the policy ends when I p/x the old boat for a new one and are sending me a quotation for the new boat.

So, I have applied for quotations from Y and Pantanaeus too..

:)
 
DavidJ said:
......also for the first year Y gave me "legal cover" which Traffords charge me £19 for.

Sue and Claire from Y are superb in customer service. Can't praise them enough.
Well done Y
Click to expand...

Psst, they do that with everyone. :encouragement: And don't tell anyone, but they will do it again next year. :encouragement::encouragement:
 
Chris_Robb said:
Mike - a bit late to this thread as its on the MOBO section.
Click to expand...
Thanks Chris. I'm loath to change from Nav & Gen myself although I will if necessary. I would be very interested to hear whether they do change your actual policy document or not
 
kcrane said:
Agreed... and I got a reply detailing the relevant clause:

[3. Exclusions… The insured is not covered for…]
3.4 any loss, damage, liability or expense directly or indirectly arising from:
3.4.1 lack of reasonable maintenance
3.4.2 wear and tear;
3.4.3 gradual deterioration, weathering or damp;
3.4.4 corrosion or electrolysis;
3.4.5 damage caused by insects or marine life;
3.4.6 mechanical breakdown;
3.4.7 accumulation of rainwater or snow in or on the Vessel unless resulting from rare and extreme weather conditions.
However if any of the following causes of loss results from one of the excluded causes under section 3.4 above the Insurer will pay for the resulting direct loss or damage; FIRE, SINKING, SUBMERSION, RIGGING FAILURE, COLLISION OR STRANDING.

I read that as saying they don't cover the damage to a component caused by corrosion or electrolysis, so you can't claim to have a seacock replaced. BUT, if the seacock fails and results in a sinking or submersion, then they will pay out. Do others read that the same way?

PS - like VP my Pants quote is very high, too high to consider given HKJ came in much lower.
Click to expand...

Amazing as just going through the same myself on this.

I too read 3.4 (and all sub clauses) as the above has read it, but I have just asked the question if 3.4 (as far a 'sinking & submersion' are concerned) is not negated and hence not covered by the effect of 3.14. I know 3.14 specifies machinery and electrical equipment but the reality is that if any of that equipment has been immersed then it's replacement would entail huge amounts of repair work through out the whole boat.
'Y' just use the word 'water' (which would include seawater and hence include 'sinking & submersion') in this clause (3.14) where Pants, in a similar exclusion, use the word 'rainwater'.
Beyond this though I think that the 'Y' policy looks good compared to most others and for me currently is about 60% cheaper! so it looks like I'll be going that way soon too!
 
Yes. That's exactly why I said above that 3.14 isn't acceptable in my book and yu should seek modification of it at the bigger boat end of the market. All explained above
 
jfm said:
Yes. That's exactly why I said above that 3.14 isn't acceptable in my book and yu should seek modification of it at the bigger boat end of the market. All explained above
Click to expand...

Sorry must have missed that jfm.....was that specific to the 'Y' policy and did you advise a mod to the wording?
 
Yes and yes. It's all above. Note that HKJ and Y policies are essentially the same. Same underwriter. So my comments above on HKJ can be taken as applicable generally to Y
 
Last edited:
Yes I see that now having just received a copy of the new 'Y' policy draft. What impact on the above do you think 4.12 has? Would damage from a leak gland to the prop shaft or valve spindles not be covered? Not always a sudden catastrophe but can be so over several days left unattended.
 
Just been very impressed by swift and total acceptance by GJW of a claim for compound problems following prop shaft vibrations after picking up a fishing net - admittedly my only boat insurance claim ever.

Also always been impressed by their swift and cost-free addition of e.g. single-handed clause, single-handed at night clause (which does double the excess but that's all).
 
Nick_H said:
I've liked dealing with GJW, and they've paid claims (albeit smallish ones) that they could have argued, so rather than change insurer I asked them to change the clause. They first offered a reassurance of how they would interpret the corrosion clause, which I rejected, and they've now promised to send something in writing which makes it contractual.

I'll post on here when I receive it.
Click to expand...

did it arrive Nick?
 
Well it took a while, which I think was down to a genuine misunderstanding of what was required, but I now have a letter from GJW, signed by the underwriter, confirming that as long as I carry out reasonable checks and maintenance then the exclusion of electrolysis or corrosion will not apply. They've maintained all along that this is how they would interpret the standard policy anyway, but it's good to have a signed letter confirming it.
 
Nick_H said:
Well it took a while, which I think was down to a genuine misunderstanding of what was required, but I now have a letter from GJW, signed by the underwriter, confirming that as long as I carry out reasonable checks and maintenance then the exclusion of electrolysis or corrosion will not apply. They've maintained all along that this is how they would interpret the standard policy anyway, but it's good to have a signed letter confirming it.
Click to expand...
Nick - read your contract - there will be a clause in it which says that the contract stands in its entirety or words to that effect. It means that all changes have to be within the contract. I doubt whether that letter would stand up in court - if it came to it.

They should do the change within the contract - which is a lot of work for them as all the summaries and wording have to be changed following days with Lawyers. Push them, I did and got a change made in the contract.
 
Chris_Robb said:
Nick - read your contract - there will be a clause in it which says that the contract stands in its entirety or words to that effect. It means that all changes have to be within the contract. I doubt whether that letter would stand up in court - if it came to it.

They should do the change within the contract - which is a lot of work for them as all the summaries and wording have to be changed following days with Lawyers. Push them, I did and got a change made in the contract.
Click to expand...
You are saying that with GJW you got a contract with different wording?
 
Last edited:
No - another major - but they have asked me not to name them at the moment.

Insurers do these vague clauses to give them leeway in settling claims when they have unhappiness about the maintenance standards - understandable on old boats and a bit of a conundrum to deal with.
 
Chris_Robb said:
Anyway - I am waiting for a reply from them on this - reading this thread it seems that any side email is irrelevant to the main contract. (Thanks JFM for your insight)

I am loath to change from Nav and Gen because for a 20 year old rag and stick job, they have the best rig cover which is almost a new for old. I was not at all happy with Pants cover on this (back in 2000) which said the would effectively only pay the life left in the rig - ir a whopping betterment clause. If we had lost the whole rig then they may only have paid 1/4 of the cost of replacement - which was too big a cost for me to stand. I don't know what they do currently.
Click to expand...

Chris, did N & G reply on this and alter your contract? I am about to broach this question myself with my broker who insures me with N & G
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

steved
Original boat paperwork
2
Replies
30
Views
928
steved
steved
Frogmogman
My next boat.
2 3
Replies
40
Views
1K
fredrussell
F

Share this page

Top