Haven Knox-Johnston wins the YBW outstanding service award , you voted for it

DAKA

DAKA

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 Jan 2005
Messages
9,258
Location
Nomadic
Visit site
The Outstanding Customer Service Award, sponsored by Garmin Europe, is voted for by readers of Motor Boat & Yachting and Motor Boats Monthly and visitors to ybw.com and is described as “the most prestigious award in the industry for excellent customer relations.”

Well done Haven Knox-Johnston :D

I missed the opportunity to vote , I didnt see the thread but never mind, they would have got my vote, so well done Haven-Knox Johnston.

Full details here, here http://www.boatinsure.co.uk/testimonials.aspx
 
Last edited:
DAKA said:
The Outstanding Customer Service Award, sponsored by Garmin Europe, is voted for by readers of Motor Boat & Yachting and Motor Boats Monthly and visitors to ybw.com and is described as “the most prestigious award in the industry for excellent customer relations.”

Well done Haven Knox-Johnston :D

I missed the opportunity to vote , I didnt see the thread but never mind, they would have got my vote, so well done Haven-Knox Johnston.

Full details here, here
Click to expand...

The awards are sponsored by Pantaenius!
 
DAKA said:
Thank you for the link Paul, it seems neither the readers of MBM / MB&Y , or forum posters/readers were actually asked to vote then. We were just given the opportunity to send in nominations , any voting was by YBW staff presumably .

good result IMHO , Haven Knox-Johnston have been fair to me in the past :D
Click to expand...

Daka, Daka, Daka, are you being a little scamp again and stirring up trouble? :D

There was a sticky on the forum about it at the time inviting nominations/votes. There was also something in both MBM and MBY about it and again inviting votes. Lastly there were news stories on MBM, MBY and YBW webpages inviting nominations. I would also put my lunch on the fact that the MBM, MBY and YBW newsletters that go out on email to people who have signed up to them, also advised about nominating for the award.
 
neale said:
Daka, Daka, Daka, are you being a little scamp again and stirring up trouble? :D

There was a sticky on the forum about it at the time inviting nominations/votes. There was also something in both MBM and MBY about it and again inviting votes. Lastly there were news stories on MBM, MBY and YBW webpages inviting nominations. I would also put my lunch on the fact that the MBM, MBY and YBW newsletters that go out on email to people who have signed up to them, also advised about nominating for the award.
Click to expand...

Seriously Neale, no thats not my intention.
As far as I am aware (going from memory now), for the last 3 years YBW have boasted about an award that is nominated and voted for by the readers but as far as I can tell we are only invited to nominate.

There is a huge difference between being allowed to nominate

and actually getting to vote .




Just my opinion, it doesnt really affect me anyway, happy to agree to disagree seeing as I would have happily nominated and voted for them anyway.:)
 
Last edited:
Just to state first that I have no part in the process of nominations, votes or awarding the honour.

I have always assumed that a nomination was the same as a vote. Therefore a nomination was counted as a vote and the two words could be inter changeable.
 
neale said:
I have always assumed that a nomination was the same as a vote. Therefore a nomination was counted as a vote and the two words could be inter changeable.
Click to expand...

thanks Neale, that explains it then, I didnt realize the legal definition of Vote or nomination differed so much from the common misconception .

Now I know I will be happy to send in my nominations next year, perhaps the magazine readers and forum sticky could also include

a) definition of Vote
b) definition of Nomination
c) list of companies already nominated (voted ) so we can add our nomination

In the past I actually posted on here the company I nominated, this could have stopped them getting further nominations (votes) as others may also have misunderstood the legal definition of nomination , ie, having thought that a company was already nominated there appeared no need to do anything until voting time ( if they had realized that nomination actually means vote they could have doubled up on the nomination) doh !

Do you know if there is there a limit on how many times we can nominate ?
 
Daka, are you sure you are happy being "insured" by Haven Knox Johnson, having read the other thread? http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?346044-Traffords-Insurance-anyone-dealing-with-them

In IPC's defence, the opportunity to nominate or vote was quite well advertised - there was a sticky on here plus other invitations to vote/nominate. That said, it is now unclear what the process was because like you I'm unsure if we were voting or nominating. We were asked to name a company and give reasons, but Neale has since suggested that the reasons given part played no part in the process and we were just voting. You wouldn't think they could screw up something this simple but they sure can
 
Last edited:
Well, I nominated Harris Hoods, following the work Chris did on Rafiki's new canopy, and was really disappointed to find that he hadn't won. :(

However, I am a satisfied customer of HJK too.
 
jfm said:
Daka, are you sure you are happy being "insured" by Haven Knox Johnson, having read the other thread? http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?346044-Traffords-Insurance-anyone-dealing-with-them
Click to expand...

I had read the thread shortly after starting this one thank you and nearly sent you a pm for clarity but instead I contacted Haven Knox-Johnston.

they have issued a new policy wording last year and there has been teething problems, scuttlebutts brought to our attention an unreasonable clause and Haven Knox-Johnston were contacted by one of their policy holders.

With in a few days Haven Knox-Johnston wrote to confirm agreement that it was unfair, unintended and that it would not apply in the way it had been taken/written in error. They re worded their new policy , dumped old stocks, wrote to existing policy holders that a new enhanced wording had been issued and the claims department would settle claims based on the new enhanced wording to all policy holders where it benefited the policy holder.

It could be one of the reasons why they were honoured with the award .

I have helped several people with Haven Knox-Johnston cover and I have been surprised several times that generous payments have been made when they could have wriggled out of payment.:)
 
I would also have voted for HKJ. I was insured with St Margarts for 18 years. My boat was hit in its mooring by another who took full responabilitly. St Margarts sent a surveyor who argued that some of damage done to my rubbing stakes could have been done before it was rammed by 36ft motorboat. This went on for two years. HKJ took over St Margarts . I assumed then that i would have an even more difficult time .They picked up my complaint when I asked. I was contacted back in less than 24 hrs from my complaint to HKJ and they agreed all costs. I can only say they were a breath of fresh are compared to St Margarts
 
DAKA said:
I had read the thread shortly after starting this one thank you and nearly sent you a pm for clarity but instead I contacted Haven Knox-Johnston.

they have issued a new policy wording last year and there has been teething problems, scuttlebutts brought to our attention an unreasonable clause and Haven Knox-Johnston were contacted by one of their policy holders.

With in a few days Haven Knox-Johnston wrote to confirm agreement that it was unfair, unintended and that it would not apply in the way it had been taken/written in error. They re worded their new policy , dumped old stocks, wrote to existing policy holders that a new enhanced wording had been issued and the claims department would settle claims based on the new enhanced wording to all policy holders where it benefited the policy holder.

It could be one of the reasons why they were honoured with the award .

I have helped several people with Haven Knox-Johnston cover and I have been surprised several times that generous payments have been made when they could have wriggled out of payment.:)
Click to expand...

The policy wording from Haven Knox Johnson that I think gives very poor cover was sent to me by them only last week. If that is the "new improved" policy I shudder to think what it was like previously.
 
jfm said:
The policy wording from Haven Knox Johnson that I think gives very poor cover was sent to me by them only last week. If that is the "new improved" policy I shudder to think what it was like previously.
Click to expand...

We are at slight crossed purposes........

I'll have to do a bit of research to be 100% sure and Im busy today but from memory.....

scuttlebutts found another issue.
told HKJ

HKJ resolved it very quickly and issued another policy wording.

I assume you have read the new policy wording and found another issue.

qualified
Its going to take me some time to search for the old scuttlebutt thread and confirm the problems are separate, first being resolved already, your new issue remains os
 
jfm said:
Daka, are you sure you are happy being "insured" by Haven Knox Johnson, having read the other thread? http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?346044-Traffords-Insurance-anyone-dealing-with-them

In IPC's defence, the opportunity to nominate or vote was quite well advertised - there was a sticky on here plus other invitations to vote/nominate. That said, it is now unclear what the process was because like you I'm unsure if we were voting or nominating. We were asked to name a company and give reasons, but Neale has since suggested that the reasons given part played no part in the process and we were just voting. You wouldn't think they could screw up something this simple but they sure can
Click to expand...

Just to clarify this the process works as follows:

We ask readers to nominate their company of choice by email giving their own details and their reasons for why they think they deserve to win.

The judges then review all the nominations taking into account both the quantity and quality of the submissions. The more nominations a company receives the better it will be ranked but a really heartfelt submission with evidence of a service above and beyond the normal call of duty will count for more than a one line nomination saying they sounded nice on the phone.

As a final check we then get back in touch with a handful of the shortlisted entries to make sure the nominations are from genuine customers.

The reason we do it like this is to prevent a purely numerical voting system that takes no account of the size and type of company or the quality of the service given. In our opionion a single vote for a training school or mail order company that did what it says on the tin should not count the same as a company that replaced a £150 handheld VHf free of charge even though it was three years out of warranty or sent a man out at 8pm on a Saturday night to fix a blocked loo on your boat to rescue your annual holiday.

It's not a perfect system but it does tend to produce the right result and allow small companies to compete on equal terms with big ones. If you have a better suggestion for how to do this I'm happy to listen.



I accept that it's not a perfect system
 
Hugo_Andreae said:
Just to clarify this the process works as follows:

We ask readers to nominate their company of choice by email giving their own details and their reasons for why they think they deserve to win.

The judges then review all the nominations taking into account both the quantity and quality of the submissions. The more nominations a company receives the better it will be ranked but a really heartfelt submission with evidence of a service above and beyond the normal call of duty will count for more than a one line nomination saying they sounded nice on the phone.

As a final check we then get back in touch with a handful of the shortlisted entries to make sure the nominations are from genuine customers.

The reason we do it like this is to prevent a purely numerical voting system that takes no account of the size and type of company or the quality of the service given. In our opionion a single vote for a training school or mail order company that did what it says on the tin should not count the same as a company that replaced a £150 handheld VHf free of charge even though it was three years out of warranty or sent a man out at 8pm on a Saturday night to fix a blocked loo on your boat to rescue your annual holiday.

It's not a perfect system but it does tend to produce the right result and allow small companies to compete on equal terms with big ones. If you have a better suggestion for how to do this I'm happy to listen.



I accept that it's not a perfect system
Click to expand...
Thanks Hugo. Neale's description in these two threads was way off the mark then. I have no ciriticism of the system as you describe it, where both the nomination and the reasons are listened to.

FWIW and IMHO, I think when awarding an insurer the judges ought to consider the terms of the policy. I wouldn't have given HKJ this prize because of the limitations in their cover. In my book, they don't deserve the "endorsement benefit" that his prize gives them, despite the fact their customer service per se seems very good. I have no doubt that HKJ's cover is pretty poor compared with the general market - I was really very surprised when I read their policy terms last week when they emailed me a proposal last week for my new boat. I fear a lot of folks just buy the policy based on the strong brand name and don't read the fine print. Anyway, whatever, I have done the best I can in these two threads to warn people about this
 
jfm said:
Thanks Hugo. Neale's description in these two threads was way off the mark then. I have no ciriticism of the system as you describe it, where both the nomination and the reasons are listened to.
Click to expand...

To be fair, my description in this thread is pretty much spot on. A nomination is a vote and vice versa. In the other thread I'll put my hands up and admit I assumed a vote was a vote and that is what mattered most. Thank you Hugo for giving us chapter and verse.

Let's change the winner here and say that XYZ boat builders won because of their exceptional customer service. Would you suggest they should not have won it because, actually, they don't build the best boat?
 
hi Neale,

I accept the way YBW award the prize at face value is very fair and reasonable.

Hi Hugo,

Thats all fine but the explanation of the award honour needs urgent needs attention , the readers have not voted , the readers have nominated and YBW have decided the winner (absolutely nothing wrong with the system, just the way it is being explained) .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top