insurance claim refused !

[Wavey]

Sorry if I'm way off the mark here but I haven't time just now to read the whole thread.

A couple of winters back I was alone and asleep on my boat when I awoke to the sound of one of the engines running. The subsequent events were virtually identical to those mentioned at the begining of the thread. Although wiring was burnt the actual cause of the engine starting on its own account was found to be moisture in the flybridge ignition switch which caused a short and started the engine. The engine concerned was a Volvo TAMD31B and the engineer advised me he had heard of this happening before on certain older Volvo units.

This may not be the same cause in your case but it certainly lead to very similar events. It wasn't a latent defect as such, just unfortunate circumstances.

If I'm talking a load of tosh excuse me but as I said I haven't had time to digest the whole thread.

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

Sorry if I'm way off the mark here ...

On the contrary...

However, if water getting into the f/b ignition switch is _not_ a latent defect (poor design of switch?) then what was the cause given as?

Cheers
Jimmy

 

[Steve Clayton]

On the contrary...

However, if water getting into the f/b ignition switch is _not_ a latent defect (poor design of switch?) then what was the cause given as?

Cheers
Jimmy

Take care!
A typical clause

The Insured is not covered for:
any loss, damage, liability or expense directly or indirectly arising from:

wait for it, wait for it


















gradual deterioration, weathering or damp;

 

[petem]

Take care!
A typical clause

The Insured is not covered for:
any loss, damage, liability or expense directly or indirectly arising from:

wait for it, wait for it

gradual deterioration, weathering or damp;

Had you read the policy a little further you would noticed the following....

------------------------

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;
3.4.8 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.

------------------------

So one could quite rightly argue that there was no Latent Defect (the boat is 10 years old or so and the fault has not become evident during all of that time) and that the fire could have been caused by 'gradual deterioration, weathering or damp;' (assuming moisture in the ignition switch).

Come on JFM, help us out here!

Pete

 

[jfm]

Pete
If the boat is 10yo then yes you're right the latent defect argument is very weak. Problem is, we have no more than a few relevant facts from OP, and no clauses apart from the single clause he quoted. I already said above "Whether the policy pays out is another matter - I'm only talking about the clause we have seen on this thread." The stuff you're quoting from isn't from OP's policy is it? Has he posted up his policy and I've missed it (in which case, sorry)? Anyway, my point is there is little point guessing and speculating, and if OP isn't going to provide material then I'm happy to wish him well but leave this thread.

Funnily enough I've spend over an hour today writing a submission to L'Ombudsman for a forumite (lurker) whose very complex claim for much more £££ than OP's is still in the insurer's "reject" pile. That one is worthwhile because they've given me all the info needed to pursue the claim.

 

[mattysupra]

hi , thanks for all the info.

the boat is 18 years old .

 

[jfm]

hi , thanks for all the info.

the boat is 18 years old .

Well that's a small start i suppose. Not sure I'd call the information flow effusive just yet though.

I suggest you write to/email the the insurers/claims handlers and ask them for a copy of the surveyor's report, and take it from there. In my experience they will normally provide this report to you

 

[mattysupra]

Pete
If the boat is 10yo then yes you're right the latent defect argument is very weak. Problem is, we have no more than a few relevant facts from OP, and no clauses apart from the single clause he quoted. I already said above "Whether the policy pays out is another matter - I'm only talking about the clause we have seen on this thread." The stuff you're quoting from isn't from OP's policy is it? Has he posted up his policy and I've missed it (in which case, sorry)? Anyway, my point is there is little point guessing and speculating, and if OP isn't going to provide material then I'm happy to wish him well but leave this thread.

Funnily enough I've spend over an hour today writing a submission to L'Ombudsman for a forumite (lurker) whose very complex claim for much more £££ than OP's is still in the insurer's "reject" pile. That one is worthwhile because they've given me all the info needed to pursue the claim.

Hi, im just trying to find the policy. i cant find it online at moment but its defo there as i looked at it two days ago. I also need to check my parents are happy for me to post it up as it has the insurers name on it.

However im insured with the same company, i have just checked my policy details and they have never sent me this .

what other info would you like apart from the policy?

thanks

 

[mattysupra]

Well that's a small start i suppose. Not sure I'd call the information flow effusive just yet though.

I suggest you write to/email the the insurers/claims handlers and ask them for a copy of the surveyor's report, and take it from there. In my experience they will normally provide this report to you

go as quick as i can answering got my hands a little full, trying to find the policy online

 

[petem]

The stuff you're quoting from isn't from OP's policy is it? Has he posted up his policy and I've missed it (in which case, sorry)?

A quick Google for the words "3.14.2 latent defect in vessel" (second result) yielded a policy document which I assume to be the same as the OP's (the same numbering of the clauses made this a likely match). Perhaps he could confirm. Words were cut and pasted from there.

Also worth noting that there's a definition of Latent defect too....

"Latent Defect means any hidden flaw, weakness or imperfection that cannot be
identified by reasonable inspection. It does not include any item that is damaged
or less effective due to use, wear and tear or similar."

Pete

 

[Steve Clayton]

go as quick as i can answering got my hands a little full, trying to find the policy online

If you saw it two days ago then it will be in your browser history

 

[Philiz]

Also worth noting that there's a definition of Latent defect too....

"Latent Defect means any hidden flaw, weakness or imperfection that cannot be
identified by reasonable inspection. It does not include any item that is damaged
or less effective due to use, wear and tear or similar."

Pete

I think I pretty much said that in post #20

 

[mattysupra]

If you saw it two days ago then it will be in your browser history

was on work PC and im not on that at moment, i have been sent a few different policy details by email (thanks to the person who has sent them) and there seems something strange. I cant get hold of my parents to confirm something on the policy.

Bare with me.

 

[[2068]]

I cant get hold of my parents to confirm something on the policy.

Maybe the loss adjuster has them tied up in the basement

 

[Elessar]

Part Dismantle engine to get to damaged parts. Rebuild the dismantled engine , remove interior of boat (seats , panels, roof lining, dashboard, etc) Boat is 11 meters and fly-bridge so over 2 floors.


The cost of the claim is not in dispute, the engineer who came out to inspect after the quote was submitted agreed that the labour / time needed is correct.


But ye, if you can do that much cheaper you can do the work if your qualified to do so?



Loads of room if you fancy doing the work without taking the engine apart ?

OK my first guess was sealine F36, but you can get down in front of the engines in those.
Surely the latent defect is you can't mend the engines! What masterpiece of design is it?

 

[Brian Legal]

Insurance problem

Apologies for butting in and for perhaps not reading all the thread but it seems to me that you need to take quite a tough line on what was a potentially nasty proble. They answer is that they can't simply rely upon a technicality. However, it is quite common for some insurers to take this line and try to do so.

The letter from your insurer is quite interesting in that it says that "from the information provided by the surveyor …………." In other words it seems that a claims handler at your insurer has simply interpreted the surveyor's report to say that this is a "latent defect". Have you seen this report and are you in a position to take a view on this point? I would perhaps suggest that if you have not done so you see what the surveyor actually wrote, bearing in mind that a latent defect is essentially a hidden flaw that could not be discovered by reasonable inspection. It seems to me that there was a wiring "fault" (to quote your insurer). This in itself is not a "latent defect".

If after looking at this, you think that the problem was fault rather then a hidden flaw you may like to consider whether you have been treated unfairly. If so, read the small print at the very end of your policy, which should say something along the lines "If we cannot resolve your complaint to your satisfaction or if you remain dissatisfied following receipt of a final response from us you can ask the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) to formally review your case."

This is a very good tool to use and stops well short of employing the likes of me! I have seen it work in the past. It gets your claims file up the pecking order and on to the desk of the person at your insurer that deals with complaints. The claim is not large so they may well be minded to pay. Give it a go??

Brian

 

[fireball]

Apologies for butting in

Don't apologise ... that's what these threads are for - putting in your 2penneth worth ... sometimes it's just little snippets from these that are enough to help resolve the OP's problems ..

You don't seem to be saying much different to the rest of us though - which is basically - get the surveyors report and challenge the decision on what is a "latent defect" ...

 

[Brian Legal]

Insurance problem

Yes but I am pushing the threat of formal complaint to the FOS. It does work and gets the matter pushed up to a higher level at the insurer, who will, if there is any doubt at all, reconsider.

 

[Whitelighter]

Brian legal,

Are you based in Bournemouth by any chance?

 

[Brian Legal]

Insurance problem

Live in Bournemouth, work in Plymouth / Exeter