Insurance Knockback

[claymore]

Pantaenius - my admirable insurer for the past 10 years or so - have written to say that the underwriters don't like me anymore and so are not offering me cover for next year (Expires September 17th)
Phoned up in something of a tiz and after a few hours they said they would cover me - at an increased premium. They are suggesting that something which hitherto has cost me around £300 should now be £586.
They also gave me the details of another broker who I rang and got sorted for the original cost with Navigators and General. Naturally I'll have to get a new survey as its 6 years since it was last done but they have kindly said that they could let this wait until Claymore comes ashore at the end of October.
My big concern - which I think I've sorted out is that I seem to remember it saying "Have you ever been refused insurance?" on new proposal forms. Technically I suppose I had at first - anyway its a sad episode as I had always found the service from Pantaenius exemplary and they were are brilliant company to deal with.
Thye offered me house insurance last year which I didn't take up - wonder if this would have made a difference?

<hr width=100% size=1>regards
Claymore
/forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[qsiv]

IANL, but I would feel that they didnt refuse you cover, as they offered it at a rate you chose not to accept. I also suspect that the wording on most policies asks whether you have had an application for insurance declined, also not the case.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[claymore]

Hmm - the original letter was a refusal really - the offer of cover at a higher premium only came after I'd phoned them back.

<hr width=100% size=1>regards
Claymore
/forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[Evadne]

The wording I had during a similar experience many years ago was such that the broker decided not to ask the insurers to insure me, so they never actually turned me down. Something to do with having an old boat. I changed to St. Margarets who were happy to take my money and, although I've never had to claim in the last 10 years, the premium is ok and the survey interval has gone up from 6 years to 9, so I've no complaints.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Rob_Webb]

What was the original reason Pantaenius gave for chosing not to renew?


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[StephenW]

Hi.

I also tried to renew with Pantaneus recently and the premium quoted was 40% more than last year dsepite not having claimed. My advice to them was to revise their policy or see a lot of business depart. I've also heard of them simply refusing to re-insre boats that have been insured with them for years. Not a particularly customer friendly approach.

I went to Bishps Skinner and although the insurance is not quite as "all-in" as Pantaneus it provides everything that I need at a good sensible price.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

I would agree - to refuse you, you must have asked (which you hadnt). Semantically they were not offering to renew (because your boat didnt fit their business profile I suspect).

More importantly - when you did ask, they explicitly offered cover.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ParaHandy]

herewith letter giving their reasons:

Dear Mr Claymore

We fully understand that in order to improve the weather protection and general "all round fluffy feeling", as you put it, the building of an extension conservatory which overhangs the stern by some 5 mtrs might well enhance the comfort of those onboard. We may have been inclined to accept that if it wasn't for the inclusion of a "real" coal fire and bunker. We feel the fire risk to be unacceptably high.

Furthermore, we do appreciate that your duties as chairman of the allotment society would be made easier with the inclusion of a vegetable patch on the foredeck wherein you might grow the prized brassicas for which you are a world wide authority. We have no objection to the additional structures eg lean-to or garden shed nor are we perturbed at your suggestion of glassing in the area but we are anxious that the automatic sprinkling system which is without proper run-offs may result in sinking the boat.

..... more guff and rubbish

Given the considerable expenditure of cash and resources you have expended, you note that additional protection to your property is required. Most settle for a stout padlock and chain. We know of little such nefarious activity in the general area you sail which requires the mounting of a howitzer ....

more tosh for next several pages ....

Yrs sincerely


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[NigeCh]

Uninsured and uninsurable

(for a reasonable premium) ...

All starts to go well with the talk-to-the-underwriter, but as soon as I mention the words 'swinging mooring' and 'Menai Strait' there is a prolongued silence followed by "Sorry - We can't/won't take you on."

"How just about 3rd party only," says I

"Sorry, try elsewhere."

Click.

It's the refusal to even take on a 3rd party risk that gets me. (OK, there are a few insurance companies who will take me on .... but I'm not going to pay many hundreds of £££ when, prior to 911, a fully comprehensive premium was £82 with n-factorial years of earned no-claim bonus . Quotes, for 3rd party only, now range from £289 through £724 per annum.)

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Tumblehome]

You are, I'm afraid, one of many either facing hugely increased premiums or even having cover refused, Claymore. Pantaenius has been 'thinning out' their client list; others may follow - yacht insurance has not, I am told, been making sufficient profit for underwriters in recent years. Unfortunately, I think the issue may only be starting to bite.

This has also hit those who are cruising long-distance. In one very recent case a couple I heard of sailing a Bowman 40 round the world were refused cover when their policy came up for renewal in Australia, after years with the same insurance company and no claims. They tried a number of alternatives without luck before eventually managing to get cover through a broker.

This prompted me to look at what has changed and why. I have written a two-page report which will be published in the September issue of Yachting World - out 14 August.

Hope this is of interest.

Elaine Bunting
Features Editor, YW

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Mudplugger]

Like many, I suspect, Claymore included, I have recently renewed my insurance with the big P. In similar vein I have been with them since Barrie started operations in the U.K. and have always found them exceeding efficient, friendly and helpful.
However on an insured value of £30k. the premium has increased from £380. to £470. When querying the increase informed that U.K.Repair costs have risen significantly over the last couple of years and that old boats cost just as much as new, to repair.
Having checked out a couple of other brokers, and obtained quotes, have found that they all more expensive....Have paid up! to keep the girls in Plymouth happy...Suspect that this is pretty widespread and due to the perceived threat of WMDs from Irak and N.Korea..and the failure of the Brits to sign up to the Schengen Agreement.


<hr width=100% size=1>Tony W.

 

[oldgit]

That N & G ins you ended up with courtesy of a broker is the same N & G ins available on the internet sans the 150 + odd quid commision via <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.Craftinsure.co.uk>http://www.Craftinsure.co.uk</A>

<hr width=100% size=1>Two boats please one here n one in the Med

 

[charles_reed]

Insurers

Pantanaeus, as a broker, are entirely in the hands of their underwriter - so it is perhaps unfair to "blame" them.

I am afraid that this is just part of the picture unfolding - yacht insurance, in common with all other forms of insurance has become extremely unprofitable and, as the underwriters have, just like you and me, to eat, premiums are rising and will rise even further in the next 2 years.

Par for the course is a 35% increase this year and a probable doubling of premiums over the 3 year period.
At the same time insurers are taking the opportunity to rid themselves of "potential high risk" customers - those with old boats, those who are boating on a restricted budget and are deemed to skimp on maintenance, those who have a record of repeated small mishaps and those who have drying/swinging moorings.

Be of good heart though - if you're still boating in 2005 it's likely that there will be some insurance bargains around as competition returns to the marketplace.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

Surely

It was informing you that they were not inviting renewal?

Tho' most proposal forms ask if you have ever been declined cover or had special conditions set.

I have a fairly robust relationship with my underwriter and with recent market changes have made sure that I cross-check everything with him - if you read their get-out clauses you'll realise they can (and frequently do) wriggle out of their implied obligations.

I asked about doing the 200M from Minorca to Sardiania single-handed this May and his response was to suggest waiving all collision damage cover, because it might take more than 2 days.

In the end I had a crew and it took less than 30 hours.

Incidentally my premium this January went down though my cover went up.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[HansBlix]

Re: Dreaded curse of Pants ...

Ulrika who vis always ready to jump into a pair particularly ven vorn by an older man happened to see this post vich you might hav seen

"On the other hand
I cannot speak too highly of Pantaenius. They have always given me excellent and rapid service and I have absolutely no complaints and have said this a number of times on the fora. I wonder if they've read them and are, as we speak, working out some extra form of loyalty and good publicity discount?"




<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ccscott49]

MIne is with big "P" and is due about the same time, my boat is older than yours and wood!! I hope they aren't going to mcancel mine, it went up a bunch last year already and I expect it to go up again, especially after I tell them I want to raise the value!! Oh! Dear, we'll see soon!

<hr width=100% size=1>