Help - Insurance Problem

[Medwaylady]

Hi

Can anyone help us? In August whilst on its mooring in Sovereign Harbour our Princess 415 started shipping water. We had an emergency lift out of the water and it was subsequently discovered the packing had come loose around the stern glands causing the boat to flood. These had been checked two years before and the boat had only been moved once during the intervening time. Whilst several repairs were done on the boat in the intervening time no leakage at all was evident.

The damage to machinery, electrics, fixtures and fittings is coming to minimum of £15,000 but we were comfortable in the knowledge we were fully insured. Unfortunately our insurance company have come back to us for the final time (we have been fighting it tooth and nail) to say the insurance on machinery and electrics is invalid because there is a clause in the policy that says they will only cover ingress of water if the hull of the boat has been breached. Also they won't pay out on fixtures and fittings because the stern glands should be inspected more frequently than they have been. Every three months was suggested.

They are even refusing to pay for the dry dock charges (£174 x 7 weeks) which is the length of time it took them to come to this conclusion. They have offered us a total of £700.

If anybody can give some advice it would be so gratefully received. To be honest we are angry, frustrated and out of pocket.

 

[volvopaul]

Hi

Can anyone help us? In August whilst on its mooring in Sovereign Harbour our Princess 415 started shipping water. We had an emergency lift out of the water and it was subsequently discovered the packing had come loose around the stern glands causing the boat to flood. These had been checked two years before and the boat had only been moved once during the intervening time. Whilst several repairs were done on the boat in the intervening time no leakage at all was evident.

The damage to machinery, electrics, fixtures and fittings is coming to minimum of £15,000 but we were comfortable in the knowledge we were fully insured. Unfortunately our insurance company have come back to us for the final time (we have been fighting it tooth and nail) to say the insurance on machinery and electrics is invalid because there is a clause in the policy that says they will only cover ingress of water if the hull of the boat has been breached. Also they won't pay out on fixtures and fittings because the stern glands should be inspected more frequently than they have been. Every three months was suggested.

They are even refusing to pay for the dry dock charges (£174 x 7 weeks) which is the length of time it took them to come to this conclusion. They have offered us a total of £700.

If anybody can give some advice it would be so gratefully received. To be honest we are angry, frustrated and out of pocket.

I would read your policy very carefully.

It sounds to me as you have neglected vital servicing and maintainance on your boat. Wether you go to sea and use your boat or not for cruising you realy should have had the glands inspected on a regular basis. If there the type that has packing they always drip a little especially after a run out at sea and often just need half a turn on each nut to re compress the packing to a level where they virtually stop dripping. It sounds to me this wasn't the case.

Do should employ a pro outfit to repack them and did you check them or employ them to periodically check them.

To know the 415 well as I've owned a 410 for the last 5 years. You engine bay bilge pump should have kept up with the ingress quite easily as long as the pumps were in order and the batteries topped up and the charger on.
The marina should have noticed a constant flow of water from the pump skin fittings surely?

Did the boat go down very quickly or was it over a period of time?

The design of the gland presuming its the standard one fitted may have been packed incorrectly or with the wrong diameter packing, maybe a check with the company that did it may reveal the part number of packing used as it seems strange to me that the packing came out or adrift as its packed into the gland and there is little clearance between the compressing part and the tube where the packing lies.

I often repack boats in the water, most of the time there is little water coming in even when the packing gland is out of the studs while new packing is cut to size and pushed in.

You need to tell us more about the case and who and how was it done, also the insurance co may be nice as of late we have had a couple of companies that have not played ball over normal claims.

Maybe in this case you could inform the ombudsman to fight your case.

 

[Beamishken]

sounds like you neglected the boat & its maintenance why expect the insurance to pay when you don't take care of something.

I've found marine insurance companys to be usually quite good but without further info on what steps you took to maintain the boat this looks like a simple case of neglect

sorry if I sound harsh but 2 years & no lift out seems crazy to me

If insurance companies pay out for every case of neglect we would all be paying much more for our cover

think you learned an expensive lesson in the importance of preventative maintenance

 

[[70521]]

Sorry to hear of your news, but it is your responsibility to maintain the vessel not the insurance company to bail you out.

 

[jfm]

Whether you were or weren't neglectful is neither here nor there. You have an insurance contract which requires the insurance company to pay out upon certain events but not others. Whether the insurance company is liable to pay depends entirely upon the wording of the contract. It's impossible to advise further without seeing the contract. Can you post a link or state exactly which policy you have?

 

[DAKA]

Whether you were or weren't neglectful is neither here nor there. You have an insurance contract which requires the insurance company to pay out upon certain events but not others. Whether the insurance company is liable to pay depends entirely upon the wording of the contract. It's impossible to advise further without seeing the contract. Can you post a link or state exactly which policy you have?

I notice that you keep recommending Pantaenius , is this one of the areas where Pantaenius would pay out without quibble ?

I'm sure most of us would at least check stern glands more frequently than once in two years but there are many other ways of sinking I am surprised at the forums overall lack of sympathy towards the op (except jfm ), we can all sink and many of us are not adequately insured for gradually operating causes.

.
..................the list is endless where water can ingress and the bilge pump keeps us afloat until it becomes blocked or the battery expires, frost damage or accidental engineer damage may go unnoticed for several months by the time the marina staff realize the engines are swamped and impossible to prove how the sinking came about.

 

[sailorman]

Who was the OP insured with, could prove a benefit to others to know that

 

[Beamishken]

quote I'm sure most of us would at least check stern glands more frequently than once in two years but there are many other ways of sinking I am surprised at the forums overall lack of sympathy towards the op (except jfm ), we can all sink and many of us are not adequately insured for gradually operating causes.quote


I think the lack of sympathy can be explained by those of us who maintain our vessels to a high standard not wanting to subsidise those who neglect essential maintenance via increased premiums

marine insurance is by comparison fairly cheap however if everyone took the op's approach to maintenance & expected the insurers to be our safety net the premiums would soon rise

sorry if this sounds harsh but we are all on a budget & I for one object to paying (via higher premiums) for others mistakes

 

[DAKA]

I think the lack of sympathy can be explained by those of us who maintain our vessels to a high standard not wanting to subsidise those who neglect essential maintenance via increased premiums



sorry if this sounds harsh but we are all on a budget & I for one object to paying (via higher premiums) for others mistakes

Lets just suppose you pay a boat mechanic to change your oil.(or if you do that yourself , something more complex).

While changing the oil the mechanic inadvertently slips and either kicks and splits a raw water hose or cracks your log tube.
He has a quick look but all appears well and forgets about it.
A petty seep starts .

Several months pass and the seep carries on but the bilge pump deals with it.

Then the hose or tube fails, water ingress increases , the bilge pump works well and keeps you afloat but you are steadily sinking.

eventually someone notices your boat is listing (not always easy to spot if tied tight) , its too late your engines have been submerged for a week .

Trying to claim off the mechanic is going to be impossible, you have no proof he did it 2-3 months ago.




Now assuming all the surveyor finds is an aged cracked log tube / aged split raw water hose , do you think your Insurers are likely to cough up for new engines .

I think we can all find ourselves in the same position as the op and it will be interesting to see if Pantaenius give a positive response if jfm poses the hypothetical question to them regarding slow ingress of water damage to machinery .

( I check and change my stern glands on a regular basis but there are plenty of other ways to sink)

 

[jrudge]

There are 2 sides to this ..... 1. what does the insurance contract say and 2. what does the manual that came with the boat say about stern glands.

I know nothing about them (out drives), but a design that lets a boat sink unless tweaked seems flawed.

With my Sterndrives I know that Volvo recommend bellows every 2 years. I follow this. Interesting so if the bellows were replaced 25 months ago would insurance be invalid. Mine were done about 13 months ago. My definition of 2 years is pretty loose as in when it coincides with a lift out. Boat was lifted in April. Will probably be very briefly lifted next April, but bellows would prob be replaced the lift after that, whenever that is.

This post does not suggest the need to fiddle with them at 10 minute intervals.

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?187939-Maintenance-Free-Stern-Glands

 

[sailorman]

Y Yacht Ins Wording

[Important features and benefitsAll risks cover for loss, damage, theft and third party liability (see clauses 1.1 and
1.5) - unless otherwise stated.
• Cover extends to include direct loss or damage caused by latent defect, wear
and tear or mechanical breakdown resulting in FIRE, SINKING, SUBMERSION,
RIGGING FAILURE, COLLISION OR STRANDING. (See clause 1.1.2 and 3.4)
• Cover extends to include loss or injury the insured or owner suffers whilst the
vessel is in charge by another person (see clause 3.16)
• No excess or loss of no claims bonus (if applicable) for loss or damage to the
vessel when berthed on a pontoon or ashore in a marina (see clause 5.5)
• Automatic cover for Personal Belongings to the value of £2,000 (see clause
1.6), (increased value available on request)
• Cover for outboard motor, tender and liferafts up to the values stipulated in
the Certificate of Insurance.]

[3 EXCLUSIONSTHIS CLAUSE IS PARAMOUNT AND APPLIES TO ALL THE AGREED USES OF
THE VESSEL.
The Insured is not covered for:
3.1 any claims for loss of use of the Vessel or any loss of profits, travel
expenses or other indirect losses of any description;
3.2 any reduction in the value of the Vessel whether due to damage and
repair or otherwise;
3.3 any claims caused by any act or omission of the person in charge of the Vessel
if they were impaired following the consumption of alcohol or drugs;
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. However, unless covered by manufacturer’s
warranties, physical damage to main engines and attached gearboxes
is covered, within the scope of clause 1 other than as a result of misuse,
if they are less than 5 years old, professionally installed and maintained
and modified to manufacturer’s recommendations.
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.
3.5 the cost of making good any defect resulting from any repair, alteration or
maintenance work carried out on the Vessel whether or not resulting from a
claim under this insurance;
3.6 any loss, damage, liability or expense incurred:
3.6.1 to remedy a fault or error in design or construction; or
3.6.2 by reason of efforts to improve or alter the design or construction.
3.7 the cost of altering or replacing parts of the Vessel that are undamaged in
order to match parts that have been repaired or replaced;
3.8 theft of any insured gear and equipment or Personal Belongings:
3.8.1 from inside the Vessel or a locked vehicle unless following violent
forcible entry into the Vessel, place of storage or locked vehicle;
Y YACHT INSURANCE POLICY (FOR OYSTER YACHTS ) WORDING (CONT)
10
Y YACHT INSURANCE POLICY (FOR OYSTER YACHTS ) WORDING (CONT)
11
3.8.2 from the exterior of the Vessel unless securely fixed to the Vessel and
violence and force was required to remove the insured gear and
equipment or Personal Belongings;
3.8.3 theft of the outboard motor unless secured to the Vessel or tender or
Boat by an anti-theft device specifically designed and marketed for
the purpose in addition to its normal method of attachment,
or following violent forcible entry into the Vessel or place of storage; or
3.8.4 theft or loss of a tender not permanently marked with the name of the
parent Vessel or other identifiable mark.
3.9 loss of or damage to the following sails while in use if split by the wind or
blown away:
sails older than 2 years, all spinnakers and cruising shutes, all sails with cloth
weight of 0.75 oz or less.
3.10 loss, damage, liability or expense directly or indirectly arising from:
3.10.1 capture, seizure, arrest, restraint, detainment or custody including, but
not limited to, costs or expense incurred to prevent such a possibility;
3.10.2 war, civil war, revolution, rebellion, insurrection, civil conflict or similar;
3.10.3 riot or similar disturbance; or
3.10.4 terrorism (unless cover is obligatory under the relevant law)
3.11 loss, damage, liability or expense directly or indirectly caused by or
contributed to or arising from:
3.11.1 ionising radiations from or contamination by radioactivity from any
nuclear fuel or from any nuclear waste or from the combustion of
nuclear fuel;
3.11.2 the radioactive, toxic, explosive or other hazardous or contaminating
properties of any nuclear installation, reactor or other nuclear
assembly or nuclear component thereof;
3.11.3 any weapon or device employing atomic or nuclear fission and/or
fusion or other like reaction or radioactive force matter; or
3.11.4 the radioactive, toxic, explosive or other hazardous or contaminating
properties of any radioactive matter. The exclusion in this sub-clause
does not extend to radioactive isotopes, other than nuclear fuel, when
such isotopes are being prepared, carried, stored, or used for commercial,
agricultural, medical, scientific or similar peaceful purposes.]

 

[maby]

I'm sorry to say that I'm not surprised - they would say that insurance is there to protect against loss of the boat due to accidents and unexpected breakage - if something had actually broken and had been maintained to manufacturer's specification, you would probably be covered but if a stern gland starts leaking a couple of years after it was last maintained, I would expect them to push back. In general, mechanical failure is not covered - it's the loss of the boat due to mechanical failure - you didn't lose the boat! You probably would have had more luck if you had allowed it to sink.

 

[gravygraham]

Who was the OP insured with, could prove a benefit to others to know that

I've got no axe to grind but suggest it'd not be fair to name the Ins co at this point.

 

[maby]

P.S. look at it from the same point of view as car insurance - if the steering fails and you get it to a garage, they don't want to know; if the steering fails and you write the car off against a tree, they will pay up....

 

[jfm]

I notice that you keep recommending Pantaenius , is this one of the areas where Pantaenius would pay out without quibble ?

I just looked Daka and I don't think Pantaenius would pay out in this case. They cover "sudden and accidental inrush of water" but not a slow seep. I think Y might pay - see their clauses above. It depends upon what is meant by the word "submersion". The boat was not submerged here, but some items of machinery possibly were, or possibly not if the water didn't get to the top of the machinery that has been damaged. The "lack of mainentance" exclusion in 3.4.1 wouldn't stop a pay out, so long as the resulting event is "submersion" so it all hinges on the meaning of that word.

These exclusions are not reasons not to buy Pantaenius and Y insurance, both of whose policies are first rate imho. This slow seepage risk is of no concern to those of us who look after our boats. There are far more important clauses to worry about. I'm not aware of any insurer who would insure a "slow seepage over several months" type of peril, but happy to hear of one if anyone knows one. It's of no concern to most people, me included, because we'd never leave the boat unattended that long.

Both Pants and Y insure sinking even if resulting from lack of reasonable maintenance, so Maby is correct with her observation! Or almost correct. If it had sunk the insurer would pay, but if the boat owner "allowed it to sink" that would be different (excuse my pedantry)

OP has disappeared, or his posts are in limbo with the mods

 

[DAKA]

I'm not aware of any insurer who would insure a "slow seepage over several months" type of peril, but happy to hear of one if anyone knows one. It's of no concern to most people, me included, because we'd never leave the boat unattended that long.

IMHO I dont think you need to leave your boat for anywhere near 3 months to fall foul of this exclusion.

The OP doesnt mention how long the boat had been left for.

 

[IDAMAY]

IMHO I dont think you need to leave your boat for anywhere near 3 months to fall foul of this exclusion.

The OP doesnt mention how long the boat had been left for.

Unless I have read it wrong, we also don't know that the water ingress was "caused by slow seepage over several months." There seem to be a lot of assumptions made about the particular circumstances of the OPs case and the particulars of his insurance policy.

 

[petem]

Y Yacht Ins Wording

[Important features and benefitsAll risks cover for loss, damage, theft and third party liability (see clauses 1.1 and
1.5) - unless otherwise stated.
• Cover extends to include direct loss or damage caused by latent defect, wear
and tear or mechanical breakdown resulting in FIRE, SINKING, SUBMERSION,
RIGGING FAILURE, COLLISION OR STRANDING. (See clause 1.1.2 and 3.4)
• Cover extends to include loss or injury the insured or owner suffers whilst the
vessel is in charge by another person (see clause 3.16)
• No excess or loss of no claims bonus (if applicable) for loss or damage to the
vessel when berthed on a pontoon or ashore in a marina (see clause 5.5)
• Automatic cover for Personal Belongings to the value of £2,000 (see clause
1.6), (increased value available on request)
• Cover for outboard motor, tender and liferafts up to the values stipulated in
the Certificate of Insurance.]

[3 EXCLUSIONSTHIS CLAUSE IS PARAMOUNT AND APPLIES TO ALL THE AGREED USES OF
THE VESSEL.
The Insured is not covered for:
3.1 any claims for loss of use of the Vessel or any loss of profits, travel
expenses or other indirect losses of any description;
3.2 any reduction in the value of the Vessel whether due to damage and
repair or otherwise;
3.3 any claims caused by any act or omission of the person in charge of the Vessel
if they were impaired following the consumption of alcohol or drugs;
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. However, unless covered by manufacturer’s
warranties, physical damage to main engines and attached gearboxes
is covered, within the scope of clause 1 other than as a result of misuse,
if they are less than 5 years old, professionally installed and maintained
and modified to manufacturer’s recommendations.
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.
3.5 the cost of making good any defect resulting from any repair, alteration or
maintenance work carried out on the Vessel whether or not resulting from a
claim under this insurance;
3.6 any loss, damage, liability or expense incurred:
3.6.1 to remedy a fault or error in design or construction; or
3.6.2 by reason of efforts to improve or alter the design or construction.
3.7 the cost of altering or replacing parts of the Vessel that are undamaged in
order to match parts that have been repaired or replaced;
3.8 theft of any insured gear and equipment or Personal Belongings:
3.8.1 from inside the Vessel or a locked vehicle unless following violent
forcible entry into the Vessel, place of storage or locked vehicle;
Y YACHT INSURANCE POLICY (FOR OYSTER YACHTS ) WORDING (CONT)
10
Y YACHT INSURANCE POLICY (FOR OYSTER YACHTS ) WORDING (CONT)
11
3.8.2 from the exterior of the Vessel unless securely fixed to the Vessel and
violence and force was required to remove the insured gear and
equipment or Personal Belongings;
3.8.3 theft of the outboard motor unless secured to the Vessel or tender or
Boat by an anti-theft device specifically designed and marketed for
the purpose in addition to its normal method of attachment,
or following violent forcible entry into the Vessel or place of storage; or
3.8.4 theft or loss of a tender not permanently marked with the name of the
parent Vessel or other identifiable mark.
3.9 loss of or damage to the following sails while in use if split by the wind or
blown away:
sails older than 2 years, all spinnakers and cruising shutes, all sails with cloth
weight of 0.75 oz or less.
3.10 loss, damage, liability or expense directly or indirectly arising from:
3.10.1 capture, seizure, arrest, restraint, detainment or custody including, but
not limited to, costs or expense incurred to prevent such a possibility;
3.10.2 war, civil war, revolution, rebellion, insurrection, civil conflict or similar;
3.10.3 riot or similar disturbance; or
3.10.4 terrorism (unless cover is obligatory under the relevant law)
3.11 loss, damage, liability or expense directly or indirectly caused by or
contributed to or arising from:
3.11.1 ionising radiations from or contamination by radioactivity from any
nuclear fuel or from any nuclear waste or from the combustion of
nuclear fuel;
3.11.2 the radioactive, toxic, explosive or other hazardous or contaminating
properties of any nuclear installation, reactor or other nuclear
assembly or nuclear component thereof;
3.11.3 any weapon or device employing atomic or nuclear fission and/or
fusion or other like reaction or radioactive force matter; or
3.11.4 the radioactive, toxic, explosive or other hazardous or contaminating
properties of any radioactive matter. The exclusion in this sub-clause
does not extend to radioactive isotopes, other than nuclear fuel, when
such isotopes are being prepared, carried, stored, or used for commercial,
agricultural, medical, scientific or similar peaceful purposes.]

If I left my boat on a swinging mooring for 10 years without any maintenance whatsoever (or even use) and it sunk would this policy pay out?

 

[Pinnacle]

OP has disappeared, or his posts are in limbo with the mods

Most likely scenario. OP is probably reading the posts in the thread and is itching to reply..........but cant!

 

[oldgit]

Find it difficult,as to how in all consience,you can leave a boat unchecked for 2 years and still to expect to find it there !
Stern glands leak/they always leak/they always have done/ they always will.
However suspect the average builder has hidden the blimming things away so successfully,many non tecchy owners will not even be aware of their location or their function.