GJW Insurance

[Poignard]

I don't see you can claim the rigging is unseaworthy just because it has reached a certain age.

When I had my boat in the UK I used to unstep the mast every winter and have it and its rigging stored in a dry, purpose-built mast shed, typically for 5-6 months.

This, obviously, prolonged its life by many years, the more so since it was under cover during the worst of the year's weather.

 

[[3889]]

I have been with GJW for over 20 years and had two claims with them (neither my fault) which were both settle quickly and professionally.

However putting my surveyors hat on almost all decent insurances policies also have a clause saying it is the owners responsibility to maintain the vessel in a 'seaworthy condition' so if your mast comes down and your standing rigging is found to be old (most say over 12 years) you might be in for a surprise when they will decline the claim due to the vessel has not been maintained in a seaworthy condition unless written evidence is provided.

PS: Always keep any renewal or repairs receipts to your standing rigging as this can show you have maintained the standing rigging over time

This is why Pantaenius are worth it, in my opinion. They are possibly the only insurer to offer consequential loss, meaning that if your rig comes down through lack of maintenance whilst you won't be covered for the failed shroud, you will be covered for all other, consequential, damage.

 

[Bobc]

This is why Pantaenius are worth it, in my opinion. They are possibly the only insurer to offer consequential loss, meaning that if your rig comes down through lack of maintenance whilst you won't be covered for the failed shroud, you will be covered for all other, consequential, damage.

GJW also cover consequential loss. I had this exact conversation with her. If for instance a bottle-screw or tie-bar were to let go and the rig fall down as a result, although the failed part would not be covered it it were a latent defect, all consequential damage would be.

 

[Bobc]

I trust this puts this thread to bed. Email from GJW...

Further to our recent telephone conversation, I can confirm that, if your vessel is not racing, your mast, sails and rigging are covered for physical loss or damage caused by

Impact including stranding or grounding
Fire, explosion
Heavy weather including lightning strikes
Damage which results from a latent defect
Negligence
Theft
Malicious damage

If however you are racing your vessel and have not opted to increase the cover afforded to your policy by purchase of Endorsement 7 for racing risks, then your mast spars and rigging are only covered for physical loss or damage caused by

Stranding
Sinking
Fire
Impact

Please accept our sincere apologies for any previous confusion and inconvenience our error in communication has caused.

Kind regards

Debbie

Debbie Ashton
Senior Assistant Yacht Underwriter

 

[dankilb]

Never claimed but always had a lot of time for GJW as customer some 4 years now. Not sure where some of the more negative comments above came from?

 

[Arcady]

I’ve just had the misfortune to claim on a brand new policy. GJW have been brilliant in dealing with it. Full marks from me.

 

[Kurrawong_Kid]

Keel fractured on a racing boat. Substantial claim settled with no hassle about 18 months ago.

 

[Esmerelda]

Thanks Bobc for posting the response from GJW. I received the same email and appreciate the clarity now provided by GJW

 

[UK-WOOZY]

been with GJW for years and made numerous claims, always settled without delay

 

[Aja]

been with GJW for years and made numerous claims, always settled without delay

So that's why my insurance is so expensive

 

[UK-WOOZY]

So that's why my insurance is so expensive

yes, thanks for keeping mine relatively cheap.

 

[[3889]]

GJW also cover consequential loss. I had this exact conversation with her. If for instance a bottle-screw or tie-bar were to let go and the rig fall down as a result, although the failed part would not be covered it it were a latent defect, all consequential damage would be.

I also emailed on this specific topic and was told the opposite, that there maybe no cover in place. Pantaenius are unambiguous in stating that consequential loss is covered rather than issuing a wooly statement that they treat their insured fairly. That was a nearly 10 years ago though so maybe GJW have changed their policy wording:

'Our policy does not cover wear and tear, mechanical breakdown or latent defect including any consequential damage and that is the strict position.

e.g. We would not pay a claim in circumstances of obvious wear and tear where a mast fell down due to failure of a worn part ( e.g. corroded standing rigging) which was obviously beyond its useful life and in circumstances where this would have been readily seen by normal visual examination.

However, we would make a distinction between such a loss and one where wear and tear (or latent defect) was not readily discoverable. (Wear and tear is not a latent defect as a matter of law) Whilst the strict interpretation of the policy would be that the consequential damage would still be excluded we treat our insured's fairly ( which is also a matter of regulation) and in practice would deal with the consequential damage as a claim.'