Craftinsure insurance feedback

Portofino said:
Yes I spoke to the underwriters about this clause .
Its to deter insurance jobs .
Leaving that niggling doubt you will NOT get the dosh in the event you take it off shore and sink it and fein a full cask payout claim apparently deters said behaviour.

In reality no ones actually ( in the N+G world of boat total loss claims ) been forced to accept another similar boat .

Thus it keeps costs down for them because potential fraudsters insure elsewhere .The give you another boat scares them off .

How ever very highly customisable boats whereby the owners gone nuts with ££££ extra s in a unique way will be put off by this .
Because say JFM they reserve in the event of a loss , to replace his modded to gunwhales boat with a stock boat .
I can see the reluctance to accept that clause .

Total losses are rare anyhow .

It does not bother me this replace clause with similar.Let’s face it guys A Pershing 48 Otam 45 , Baia 48 . :) Stock ish un molested boats .Big deal .
Click to expand...
Call an ambulance. I agree!!
 
Another vote for Craftinsure. No hassle with a claim a few months back. Renewal just through with only modest uplift.
 
Aardee said:
I made a claim with Craftinsure a couple of years ago and they were quick, easy and efficient to deal with, settling without argument.
Click to expand...

Same - very helpful/efficient - I have moved on now, but the only reason being because of the usual insurance company issue of slapping on £10 every year - in my case 5 years and the premium is 50% more expensive than it was.. I'll go back in a few years when I can get the cheap offers again

PaulRainbow said:
Craftinsure state:

If the boat is over 20 years old, and more than 23' in length, you possess a full out of the water condition survey of the boat, carried out within the last 5 years by a qualified yacht surveyor, and with all recommendations completed (or a survey carried out within the past 7 years if the boat is already insured by you with Craftinsure).
Click to expand...

Mine's over 50 years old and they didn't ask for one - just a small surcharge (tenner) every year.. 'gainst that, my boat is worth no more than 1500/2K
 
Fantasie 19 said:
Same - very helpful/efficient - I have moved on now, but the only reason being because of the usual insurance company issue of slapping on £10 every year - in my case 5 years and the premium is 50% more expensive than it was.. I'll go back in a few years when I can get the cheap offers again



Mine's over 50 years old and they didn't ask for one - just a small surcharge (tenner) every year.. 'gainst that, my boat is worth no more than 1500/2K
Click to expand...

How long is your boat
 
The real showstopper for Crafinsure for me is the following exclusion....

"Loss or damage resulting from electrolysis, osmosis or similar conditions. "

There's been people, even on this forum, who have had boats sunk due to an electrolysis issue.

Another interesting exclusion....

Loss or damage to motors, electrics, batteries and their connections unless directly caused by “Boat Name” grounding or sinking (provided not due to a cause excluded within this policy), or by fire, contact with an external substance (other than water), malicious damage, theft, sudden accidental incursion of water following an identifiable and unexpected occurrence, dropping off or falling overboard of outboard motors, or by frost (providing all manufacturer’s recommendations have been followed).

If you get caught in a storm and the boat is damaged by heavy seas (aka 'water'), does this mean that you're not covered?

Regarding the conditions....

We will pay the reasonable cost of repair for loss or damage not exceeding £100,000 Reasonable replacement or repair may not result in the appearance and condition being the same as that prior to the claim. In the event of total loss or constructive total loss, we will pay £100,000 or at our option, provide a replacement boat of a similar age, size and type.

Who gets to decide what it reasonable? I fear arguments ahead.

If my boat gets damaged, I want it returning to the same condition as it was before, not some bodge job done on the cheap.
 
petem said:
The real showstopper for Crafinsure for me is the following exclusion....

"Loss or damage resulting from electrolysis, osmosis or similar conditions. "

There's been people, even on this forum, who have had boats sunk due to an electrolysis issue.

Another interesting exclusion....

Loss or damage to motors, electrics, batteries and their connections unless directly caused by “Boat Name” grounding or sinking (provided not due to a cause excluded within this policy), or by fire, contact with an external substance (other than water), malicious damage, theft, sudden accidental incursion of water following an identifiable and unexpected occurrence, dropping off or falling overboard of outboard motors, or by frost (providing all manufacturer’s recommendations have been followed).

If you get caught in a storm and the boat is damaged by heavy seas (aka 'water'), does this mean that you're not covered?

Regarding the conditions....

We will pay the reasonable cost of repair for loss or damage not exceeding £100,000 Reasonable replacement or repair may not result in the appearance and condition being the same as that prior to the claim. In the event of total loss or constructive total loss, we will pay £100,000 or at our option, provide a replacement boat of a similar age, size and type.

Who gets to decide what it reasonable? I fear arguments ahead.

If my boat gets damaged, I want it returning to the same condition as it was before, not some bodge job done on the cheap.
Click to expand...
I think you are reading it slightly wrong Pete .Not sure why it’s zurichs std stuff ?
Says “ unless directly caused by “ ……first line .Then goes on to define “ sudden incursion of water “ 3 rd line.
Which covers your scenario example.

The “ external substance ( other than water ) “ is good inho as it covers acid , paint amongst others but remember this is for the machinery .

The 2nd query you raise is the value , the sum insured in your case i assume £100 K ?? That varies per individual policy of course.

It might relate to what paper work you have starting with the BoS .Insurance Co s will challenge a figure greater than the BoS unless you have gotten them to accept why .Most accept the currency of a insurance valuation done by a professional which is normal practice in my experience dealing with underwriters in a market where values are increasing . Appreciate not everyone on this forum has come across this in every day life . Same principle applies to boats .

A surveyor will decide whats reasonable.Betterment is something they tend to push back on otherwise every Tom dick and Harry will fein a scratch and want a total respray .Same for the replacement clause , it’s to the deter insurance jobs ( sinking it in a boats case in the ocean ) for £££ brigade .

Even without the words you high lighted …..picture this your boats damaged , loss adjuster says” no problem we will fix it “
I.ll make it easy for you its berthed in Ipswich .Reassured all is in hand indeed FL s local guys with factory support are appointed. There’s still no guarantee the new gel coat or parts aren’t exactly right .
Weathered original to the new stuff .28mm dia guard rails on one side the repaired to the 29 mm on the OEM because the 15 y old OEM 29 mm is no longer available.
Apart from the very minor gel coat discrepancy which will weather in , they don’t want some burke getting all legal squabbling over a 1 mm discrepancy of guard rail diameter .Which ends up costing in legal defence/ hassle / time / agro far more than the boats value insured .Or worse still betterment .
If I was underwriting I would include that clause too .
Without it you still could as a punter end up in a row over 1mm dia guard rail discrepancy , or gel coat match with say Pants .Fill your boots .
 
Portofino said:
I think you are reading it slightly wrong Pete .Not sure why it’s zurichs std stuff ?
Says “ unless directly caused by “ ……first line .Then goes on to define “ sudden incursion of water “ 3 rd line.
Which covers your scenario example.

The “ external substance ( other than water ) “ is good inho as it covers acid , paint amongst others but remember this is for the machinery .

The 2nd query you raise is the value , the sum insured in your case i assume £100 K ?? That varies per individual policy of course.

It might relate to what paper work you have starting with the BoS .Insurance Co s will challenge a figure greater than the BoS unless you have gotten them to accept why .Most accept the currency of a insurance valuation done by a professional which is normal practice in my experience dealing with underwriters in a market where values are increasing . Appreciate not everyone on this forum has come across this in every day life . Same principle applies to boats .

A surveyor will decide whats reasonable.Betterment is something they tend to push back on otherwise every Tom dick and Harry will fein a scratch and want a total respray .Same for the replacement clause , it’s to the deter insurance jobs ( sinking it in a boats case in the ocean ) for £££ brigade .

Even without the words you high lighted …..picture this your boats damaged , loss adjuster says” no problem we will fix it “
I.ll make it easy for you its berthed in Ipswich .Reassured all is in hand indeed FL s local guys with factory support are appointed. There’s still no guarantee the new gel coat or parts aren’t exactly right .
Weathered original to the new stuff .28mm dia guard rails on one side the repaired to the 29 mm on the OEM because the 15 y old OEM 29 mm is no longer available.
Apart from the very minor gel coat discrepancy which will weather in , they don’t want some burke getting all legal squabbling over a 1 mm discrepancy of guard rail diameter .Which ends up costing in legal defence/ hassle / time / agro far more than the boats value insured .Or worse still betterment .
If I was underwriting I would include that clause too .
Without it you still could as a punter end up in a row over 1mm dia guard rail discrepancy , or gel coat match with say Pants .Fill your boots .
Click to expand...
I disagree. Let me give you an example, my companionway door is made from a particular colour of green that is no longer available off the shelf from Fairline or Perspex. If I cracked it I would expect the insurer to pay for a custom pour to make the correct shade. With the word 'reasonable', it would be hard to insist on it being done properly. Whenever you see the word reasonable, your position is weakened.

Regarding Electrolysis, this is the difference between N&G/Topsail and Craftinsure electrolysis wordings...

Craftinsure: "[Exclusion] Loss or damage resulting from electrolysis, osmosis or similar conditions."
Topsail: "[Vessel is covered for losses arising from] electrolysis caused by a sudden and identifiable cause."
 
petem said:
I disagree. Let me give you an example, my companionway door is made from a particular colour of green that is no longer available off the shelf from Fairline or Perspex. If I cracked it I would expect the insurer to pay for a custom pour to make the correct shade. With the word 'reasonable', it would be hard to insist on it being done properly. Whenever you see the word reasonable, your position is weakened.

Regarding Electrolysis, this is the difference between N&G/Topsail and Craftinsure electrolysis wordings...

Craftinsure: "[Exclusion] Loss or damage resulting from electrolysis, osmosis or similar conditions."
Topsail: "[Vessel is covered for losses arising from] electrolysis caused by a sudden and identifiable cause."
Click to expand...
Generally the underwriters all of them cover themselves against betterment and losses due to poor maintenance and recklessness , otherwise they would be bust and every one will get fixes , new parts claiming on the insurance.They will refute those claims .


I think you are kidding yourself if a part ie your cabin door colour plastic shade of green is no longer available and expect to win contesting the slightly off shade of said green any legal confrontation.
Unless the policy states exact replacement it doesn’t.

For the reasons I have said stuff becomes obsolete, stds change , my 28 mm to 29 mm dia , your 50 shades of FL grn plastic etc etc .

Not fussed re electrolysis as mine has and still is undergoing a timely maintenance regime born out by the surveyor report which includes a section on skin fittings etc .

How ever I suspect in the event of a huge claim say a sinking on the berth in the marina by a seacock fizzing away the loss adjuster will look at the maintenance history and throw words like “ recklessness + poor maintenance “ and such like at you .
Certainly ask to see your seacock replacement invoices along with pipes connected , hose clips .Those weasel words .

I feel Pete you haven’t crossed the literary what it says boundary .

Sorry to reap this up but remember the unattended @ anchor with Amlins .
“All risks “ the policy states but the underwriters wrote to me with the line of sight / rtn with 30 mins ……infering poor seaman ship .It’s not defined in the wording so don’t assume because it’s not in exclusion it’s covered .
This is where we fundamentally disagree .A fizzing seacock could be construed as poor maintenance by any underwriters weasel words inc your policy .

A fresh timely replacement set of seacocks the correct spec btw , kinda forced by the spectre of a survey is unlikely to fiz away .

I know where I stand in the sense the more written the more I can mitigate .

The big risk is not storm damage ( its an Itama , likes big seas :) ) it’s not fire it’s a none gas and petrol boat with a modern smart charger , it’s the unattended @ anchor bit in the beautiful Med with a dog .Busy anchorages surrounded by other nutters , other idiots who can’t anchor = drag , or can’t helm , or are pissed if in France etc .All out of my control .

Ie anchor in a marked chart / plotter / almanac ( take a plotter pic nowadays ) then leave the boat unattended enjoying a worry free meal etc .Or if anchoring in a unmarked anchorage one of us stay on board .Its just knowing the boundaries, the payout cut off points.

If this means a timely survey big deal .

Arh gotcha ….buy a £1.8 M new Itama 62 to save the survey fee .The 45 is too small compared to what we have .
Which ever way you look at it those maths do not add up in my book aside the fuel bill of the 1400 Hp V 12s .
I ll stick with what I have , the survey route of running a pre ferretti older Itama makes more sense .
 
Portofino said:
Not fussed re electrolysis as mine has and still is undergoing a timely maintenance regime born out by the surveyor report which includes a section on skin fittings etc .

How ever I suspect in the event of a huge claim say a sinking on the berth in the marina by a seacock fizzing away the loss adjuster will look at the maintenance history and throw words like “ recklessness + poor maintenance “ and such like at you .
Certainly ask to see your seacock replacement invoices along with pipes connected , hose clips .Those weasel words .

I feel Pete you haven’t crossed the literary what it says boundary .
Click to expand...
If you have a total loss the insurers will be looking for any clause/exclusion that can get them out of paying the claim. You may not be aware, but the seacock that caused a fellow forumite's boat to sink, fizzled away quite quicky (due to an electrical issue).

If something smilar happened to you, and you think your insurer wouldn't use the following very specific exclusion just because you check your seacocks regularly over the summer, then you're living in cloud cuckoo land!

Craftinsure: "[Exclusion] Loss or damage resulting from electrolysis, osmosis or similar conditions."
 
petem said:
If you have a total loss the insurers will be looking for any clause/exclusion that can get them out of paying the claim. You may not be aware, but the seacock that caused a fellow forumite's boat to sink, fizzled away quite quicky (due to an electrical issue).

If something smilar happened to you, and you think your insurer wouldn't use the following very specific exclusion just because you check your seacocks regularly over the summer, then you're living in cloud cuckoo land!

Craftinsure: "[Exclusion] Loss or damage resulting from electrolysis, osmosis or similar conditions."
Click to expand...
IIRC it was a replacement by a yard seacock that fizzed ? + stray currents in the marina ?

Big subject fizzing seacocks .
Boils down to the OEM integrity , there’s a huge range of quality.Happy with what Amarti ( boat builder used ) and they have been replaced like for like .The old ones were fine just dated .

To give you an idea of the spectrum out there Beneteau use brass which has a very short 5yr life .Plenty of tinternet chatter on sinking Benys .

Just had it surveyed as you know .
Boat was commissioned as a passenger water taxi by the owner an built to a certain spec / code .Eg water tight bulkheads and silver plate electrical contacts in the switch gear .The seacocks we’re not cheap d out .

If you harbour seacock anxiety , think your boats gonna sink on its berth , from there age , unknown quality , builders reputation ( lack of ) , stray currents , lack of galvanic isolation etc etc then the craftinsure policy is best avoided .

You have to balance where you think a large claim ( if any ?) is gonna come from .That depends on your usage pattern .
In this case the unattended @ anchor musings in there policy .

If you have any doubts, niggles Pete= get it surveyed ASAP for you own piece of mind .
 
It probably only applies to me but I was concerned when my 2002 boat was due it’s Craftinsure 20 yr survey so I called them today and was told I only need it for my renewal in 2023, it’s 21st year. I now have that in writing.
During the conversation she did say only critical items need addressing. Before my next renewal I will get some clarification.
As usual Craftinsure were fast and responsive.
My survey is in a couple of weeks so pressure is off for me.
Thanks to all for the debate that raised the 20 yr issue for me.
 
DavidJ said:
It probably only applies to me but I was concerned when my 2002 boat was due it’s Craftinsure 20 yr survey so I called them today and was told I only need it for my renewal in 2023, it’s 21st year. I now have that in writing.
During the conversation she did say only critical items need addressing. Before my next renewal I will get some clarification.
As usual Craftinsure were fast and responsive.
My survey is in a couple of weeks so pressure is off for me.
Thanks to all for the debate that raised the 20 yr issue for me.
Click to expand...
You can look Fwds to the written valuation on letter headed paper by a professional.Handy in todays market .
 
Just resurrecting this one because I’ve just had my 20 year survey done for Craftinsure’s requirement for next year.
All very glowing (15 pages) I’m thankful to say but it does recommend the sides being polished and the teak replaced.
Craftinsure say …. with ALL recommendations complied with.
I think come renewal next year I’ll be asking for some rewording, maybe “with all critical recommendations compiled with”
I also got a favourable valuation which is always handy.
 
Last edited:
DavidJ said:
Just resurrecting this one because I’ve just had my 20 year survey done for Craftinsure’s requirement for next year.
All very glowing (15 pages) I’m thankful to say but it does recommend the sides being polished and the teak replaced.
Craftinsure say …. with ALL recommendations complied with.
I think come renewal next year I’ll be asking for some rewording, maybe “with all critical recommendations compiled with”
I also got a favourable valuation which is always handy.
Click to expand...

I used their recommended surveyor and got the same result regarding valuation. It was well worth the cost of the survey.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top