Insurance Renwal

Greg2

Greg2

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 Jun 2002
Messages
4,637
Visit site
Following a tip on here we insured via Curtis Marine last year and got a Nav & Gen policy for a very competitive price. The renewal has just come through and the same policy is now now circa 40% more expensive. The renewal also offers another policy that would be around 8% more expensive than last year with a company I have never heard of - Tokio Marine

I have has a scan of the policy and there are one or two things I need to check but was just wondering if anyone has any experience of or knows of this company?
.
 
My renewal back in March this year was about 10% higher than in 2021 , with Haven KJ on their inland policy with 60 days coastal per year .
I thought, at the time, the price in 2021 was very good and not likely to be repeated .

Both via Topsail. But this time Topsail were not so good with discount and initially wanted to add an admin fee on top of Havens quote (which they retracted).
I expect to be looking elsewhere next year .

So if you are getting 8% increase over 2021 for the same sum insured seems like a good deal.
 
Greg2 said:
Following a tip on here we insured via Curtis Marine last year and got a Nav & Gen policy for a very competitive price. The renewal has just come through and the same policy is now now circa 40% more expensive. The renewal also offers another policy that would be around 8% more expensive than last year with a company I have never heard of - Tokio Marine

I have has a scan of the policy and there are one or two things I need to check but was just wondering if anyone has any experience of or knows of this company?
.
Click to expand...
I asked Curtis for a quote a few months ago and in quite small print I noticed Tokio Marine. I didn’t go any further. I’m with Craftinsure and have had a survey (boat 20 years old) which is required for renewal next year. The survey was glowing but said the sides need polishing and the teak redoing. The craftinsure policy says ALL recommendations need to be actioned. I have sent 3 communications to them asking for a “ALL Critical recommendations…” change or something similar. No answer back
Not impressed
Maybe back to Topsail next year
 
DavidJ said:
I asked Curtis for a quote a few months ago and in quite small print I noticed Tokio Marine. I didn’t go any further. I’m with Craftinsure and have had a survey (boat 20 years old) which is required for renewal next year. The survey was glowing but said the sides need polishing and the teak redoing. The craftinsure policy says ALL recommendations need to be actioned. I have sent 3 communications to them asking for a “ALL Critical recommendations…” change or something similar. No answer back
Not impressed
Maybe back to Topsail next year
Click to expand...

A ridiculous clause!
Our boat is over twenty but we had a pre-purchase survey in 2020 so hopefully won’t be an issue for us this year.

We are likely to look to increase the insured value of our boat so I guess it will be back to shopping around to see if we can get a better deal. To be fair, our policy last year was almost ridiculously cheap compared to others so maybe we just dropped lucky.
 
Greg2 said:
A ridiculous clause!
Our boat is over twenty but we had a pre-purchase survey in 2020 so hopefully won’t be an issue for us this year.
Click to expand...
I assume you are with Craftinsure. Be careful they won’t ask you, it’s in the policy that you have had a survey with all recommendations complied with ( I’ll try and pull out the exact wording)

Got it, Sorry it’s cut and pasted in a string but I think you can decipher it.

If“XXXXXisover20yearsoldandover23ftinlength,youhaveinyourpossessionasurveyreportnotmorethanfiveyearsoldfromaqualifiedsurveyor,with
all recommendations complied with (or a survey carried out within the past 7 years if the boat is already insured by you with Craftinsure).
 
Last edited:
I just checked with my present insurer and the premium on a like for like basis has risen by about 20% since I renewed in mid March this year .
But still less than I had paid Y yacht insurance in 2020.
Thats with Haven K J
 
DavidJ said:
I asked Curtis for a quote a few months ago and in quite small print I noticed Tokio Marine. I didn’t go any further. I’m with Craftinsure and have had a survey (boat 20 years old) which is required for renewal next year. The survey was glowing but said the sides need polishing and the teak redoing. The craftinsure policy says ALL recommendations need to be actioned. I have sent 3 communications to them asking for a “ALL Critical recommendations…” change or something similar. No answer back
Not impressed
Maybe back to Topsail next year
Click to expand...
As you know from previous ins threads I had a recent survey done in Italy but stressed it was for insurance only .
I think there’s a difference between various surveys and you need to make it clear to the guy who you are pay ing what you want .
Ie it’s not a pre purchase ?

The hull was written up as accident free undamaged un marked . It’s not been polished for the past 2 seasons as I am in the process of getting it painted hopefully, and did not want to compromise the finish by applying further wax or what ever substance .

The teak is on the bathing platform solid planks no veneers or routed sheets infilled with caulk .Therefore shows no signs of excess wear .
Sounds like you have been unlucky with your hull Polish , but without any pics of the teak it not appropriate to comment on the validity of your surveyors comment “ replace it “
Just coming back to the hull …..when was the last time is was polished ? If you don’t mind disclosing?

Not being funny or anything, I am no expert on fibre glass or other boat resins , in Sealines but maybe there’s a good scientific reason to timely wax the gel coat in the harsh Med Sun ? Thinking the sun chalking ( without wax ) eventually some how compromises the integrity.Maybe it’s not just to make it shine pretty maybe the surveyor knows a bit more about fibreglass degradation , and thought it worth from a reputation pov worth a comment ?? ie it’s not being petty he genuinely thinks it’s needs a polish .

First time for me too but 1/2 of the reason being a DIY er ( with background research ) was simply to see if the thing was basically safe for off shore passages ….piece of mind .The other 1/2 to placate craftinsure clause .

Thus he only looked at what I believe where the critical items .Fire , seacocks , shafts , rudders , props , cutlets bearings safety gear inc ERIBS , hatch locker catches , hydraulic systems , battery hygiene, Shore power connections ,chargers , anchor chain state + etc etc .

As an added bonus he valued it at 50 % more than my BoS . I had no input in that he had done his home work and coincidentally it was the figure I had in mind .He spoke first .Guess any sod can use Mr Google theses days !

Point is this a lot of ins Co s in the event of a total loss claim start at the BoS figure .Think about it why not from there pov ?
Or put another way at your first policy fresh after buying it thats the number flying about when you are arranging the very first policy.

If your boat , you reckon is worth more than your BoS for what ever reason( s ) = covid staycation madness , your added value , a do er upper , masses of added expensive kit etc etc , then most ins Co will only accept a independence qualified surveyors report to support such an uplift .

I had this out with Coleman’s and N+G basically it’s a surveyors report or BoS …….not what you think it worth by totting up a shoe box full of bills , the expense you gave lavished on it .

For me Original Amarti Itamas we’re bucking the trend and gradually rising .So for a few years i knew i was under insuring and come a total loss would never be able to buy back in with a 2014 BoS .

Now I have a 2022 insurance valuation which craftinsure have underwritten via. N+G ( Zurich) .

They upped the value to sync with the report when I requested an up lift .Previously when I requested an uplift , they said they would take my money but in the event of a total loss the loss adjuster would start with bos despite me in effect over valuing it and them accepting the premium.

A court case row would end up them refunding the premium diff and still paying out on the bos + me standing the legal fees .

You are on stronger ground with a insurance surveys valuation.

Most boats esp new popular mass produced depreciate .
 
Portofino said:
As you know from previous ins threads I had a recent survey done in Italy but stressed it was for insurance only .
I think there’s a difference between various surveys and you need to make it clear to the guy who you are pay ing what you want .
Ie it’s not a pre purchase ?

The hull was written up as accident free undamaged un marked . It’s not been polished for the past 2 seasons as I am in the process of getting it painted hopefully, and did not want to compromise the finish by applying further wax or what ever substance .

The teak is on the bathing platform solid planks no veneers or routed sheets infilled with caulk .Therefore shows no signs of excess wear .
Sounds like you have been unlucky with your hull Polish , but without any pics of the teak it not appropriate to comment on the validity of your surveyors comment “ replace it “
Just coming back to the hull …..when was the last time is was polished ? If you don’t mind disclosing?

Not being funny or anything, I am no expert on fibre glass or other boat resins , in Sealines but maybe there’s a good scientific reason to timely wax the gel coat in the harsh Med Sun ? Thinking the sun chalking ( without wax ) eventually some how compromises the integrity.Maybe it’s not just to make it shine pretty maybe the surveyor knows a bit more about fibreglass degradation , and thought it worth from a reputation pov worth a comment ?? ie it’s not being petty he genuinely thinks it’s needs a polish .

First time for me too but 1/2 of the reason being a DIY er ( with background research ) was simply to see if the thing was basically safe for off shore passages ….piece of mind .The other 1/2 to placate craftinsure clause .

Thus he only looked at what I believe where the critical items .Fire , seacocks , shafts , rudders , props , cutlets bearings safety gear inc ERIBS , hatch locker catches , hydraulic systems , battery hygiene, Shore power connections ,chargers , anchor chain state + etc etc .

As an added bonus he valued it at 50 % more than my BoS . I had no input in that he had done his home work and coincidentally it was the figure I had in mind .He spoke first .Guess any sod can use Mr Google theses days !

Point is this a lot of ins Co s in the event of a total loss claim start at the BoS figure .Think about it why not from there pov ?
Or put another way at your first policy fresh after buying it thats the number flying about when you are arranging the very first policy.

If your boat , you reckon is worth more than your BoS for what ever reason( s ) = covid staycation madness , your added value , a do er upper , masses of added expensive kit etc etc , then most ins Co will only accept a independence qualified surveyors report to support such an uplift .

I had this out with Coleman’s and N+G basically it’s a surveyors report or BoS …….not what you think it worth by totting up a shoe box full of bills , the expense you gave lavished on it .

For me Original Amarti Itamas we’re bucking the trend and gradually rising .So for a few years i knew i was under insuring and come a total loss would never be able to buy back in with a 2014 BoS .

Now I have a 2022 insurance valuation which craftinsure have underwritten via. N+G ( Zurich) .

They upped the value to sync with the report when I requested an up lift .Previously when I requested an uplift , they said they would take my money but in the event of a total loss the loss adjuster would start with bos despite me in effect over valuing it and them accepting the premium.

A court case row would end up them refunding the premium diff and still paying out on the bos + me standing the legal fees .

You are on stronger ground with a insurance surveys valuation.

Most boats esp new popular mass produced depreciate .
Click to expand...
The hull polish was an odd one. I have it done every couple of years so not this year. I don’t know if he‘s trying to drum up business for the boatyard who recommend him but it looks good to me although water doesn’t fall off it like it does after a polish.
Nothing different about Sealine gelcoat.
I agree with his view of my teak but I don’t want to be forced to do it because of my insurance company.
I‘m sure he would delete that bit if asked to be honest.
Valuation is useful. His valuation was £5k short of my revised one which I did because of mad UK prices. His was based I guess on Spanish prices which don’t seem to have changed.
 
I dropped Craftinsure as one to approach . Far too much little print and felt uncomfortable with just a few clicks to arrange. The policy imo did not appear to be as comprehensive or as wide as others such as Haven ,Nautical and GJW .

Tokio marine .How do you deal with a Japanese insurer if a problem ?
 
Just a bit of an update.

Having got revised quotes to reflect the higher value of our boat from Curtis for both the Tokio and Nav & Gen policies I have shopped around and found it to be quite a mixed bag. Policy wording is often a little ambiguous and there are surprising exclusions to be found in some when you read them closely. The range of prices is quite surprising with the lowest being Tokio by quite a margin and the highest being Topsail at around double what Tokio are asking.
 
Having now scrutinised the Tokio policy I see that it is via Geo Underwriting Services Limited who are based in London and the claims team are based in Poole. Given that the policy appears to be on a par with the Nav & Gen policy offered by Curtis I am wondering what the risk is given that Nav & Gen are 30% more expensive?

The adverse Trust pilot reviews for Tokio appear to relate to travel and health insurance and I am wondering if the involvement of a (reputable?) U.K. firm of underwriters mitigates any risk?

I am no expert on insurance but I am conscious that scrimping now might prove expensive of the worst happens. What does the panel think?
.
 
Greg2 said:
Having now scrutinised the Tokio policy I see that it is via Geo Underwriting Services Limited who are based in London and the claims team are based in Poole. Given that the policy appears to be on a par with the Nav & Gen policy offered by Curtis I am wondering what the risk is given that Nav & Gen are 30% more expensive?

The adverse Trust pilot reviews for Tokio appear to relate to travel and health insurance and I am wondering if the involvement of a (reputable?) U.K. firm of underwriters mitigates any risk?

I am no expert on insurance but I am conscious that scrimping now might prove expensive of the worst happens. What does the panel think?
.
Click to expand...
Only you can answer that because you know the coat differential and have scrutinised the policies .

You never really know how they are gonna react to a claim until you make one , a significant one .That applies to them all imho .

Looking at a car forum the topic was QX Euro car parts oil .Fully synthetic.Own brand .
Discussion went into who made it , folks didn’t really know .Some said shell others another well known brand like Castrol
Its depending on the shop around £10-20 quid cheaper than a popular brand like Moblie 1 or the other s like for like 4.5 L

Turns out it’s recycled oil not new .They filter old oil and re add some additives .

A mixed bag of reports .Some swear by it and enjoy the cost saving .Everyone had a different car different change regime , ie every 3000 to 12000 miles and every increment in between .

So you couldn’t really get a handle on it .
How ever a couple piped up with high milers , you know Mercs Volvos with hundreds of thousands of miles still going strong not burning / using oil .Eash using genuine oil recommend by Merc or Volvo .One guy with a Volvo diesel did oil analysis as well and published his last report at 530000 miles , the copper , zinc , iron was within normal spec.He wanted to know when it’s was going to expire .

Point is this both the Merc guy and the Volvo guy egged on by the cheapo QX oil used it for the first time and both never made it to the next .The engines expired .
Each one has that lingering doubt it was the QX oil .Of course they will never know .
But for the sake of 2x £10-20 quid saving they only got to use the QX once .

The Merc guy actually until using QX always went to the Merc dealer to buy there oil , he published his invoice for the previous something like £70 for 9 litres of Merc approved diesel oil .He “saved “£20 using euro car parts QX and his engine expired .

Back on topic until you make a claim which is a how long is piece of string, you never know with insurance.
 
Portofino said:
Only you can answer that because you know the coat differential and have scrutinised the policies .

You never really know how they are gonna react to a claim until you make one , a significant one .That applies to them all imho .

Looking at a car forum the topic was QX Euro car parts oil .Fully synthetic.Own brand .
Discussion went into who made it , folks didn’t really know .Some said shell others another well known brand like Castrol
Its depending on the shop around £10-20 quid cheaper than a popular brand like Moblie 1 or the other s like for like 4.5 L

Turns out it’s recycled oil not new .They filter old oil and re add some additives .

A mixed bag of reports .Some swear by it and enjoy the cost saving .Everyone had a different car different change regime , ie every 3000 to 12000 miles and every increment in between .

So you couldn’t really get a handle on it .
How ever a couple piped up with high milers , you know Mercs Volvos with hundreds of thousands of miles still going strong not burning / using oil .Eash using genuine oil recommend by Merc or Volvo .One guy with a Volvo diesel did oil analysis as well and published his last report at 530000 miles , the copper , zinc , iron was within normal spec.He wanted to know when it’s was going to expire .

Point is this both the Merc guy and the Volvo guy egged on by the cheapo QX oil used it for the first time and both never made it to the next .The engines expired .
Each one has that lingering doubt it was the QX oil .Of course they will never know .
But for the sake of 2x £10-20 quid saving they only got to use the QX once .

The Merc guy actually until using QX always went to the Merc dealer to buy there oil , he published his invoice for the previous something like £70 for 9 litres of Merc approved diesel oil .He “saved “£20 using euro car parts QX and his engine expired .

Back on topic until you make a claim which is a how long is piece of string, you never know with insurance.
Click to expand...

I get the analogy, which I think is pertinent. Having posted I went back to check what I think is an important point - agreed value. On the face of it both policies are ‘agreed value’ but the Nav and Gen policy is simply what is on the insurance cert or a replacement boat. Now I don’t really like that last bit but the Tokio policy adds more wriggle room by mentioning the last written valuation or a price it was advertised for sale at. For us owning a boat represents a significant chunk of what we have and in the event of the unthinkable happening we would want to be able to recover what we have spent. So scrimping might not be a good idea.

On a separate note GJW do a proper ‘agreed value’ inasmuch as they would pay the greed value of the boat with no caveats. Trouble is they have another clause that excludes damage to machinery in ‘heavy weather’, which isn’t defined in the policy. None of the other policies I have read have this clause and it is enough to knock them out of the running.
.
 
We had a customer had a service at a "non genuine" dealer because at £230 ours was "too dear". He saved £85
-
When his car was towed in with an "odd noise then the engine stopped" we began investigation as it was still under warranty. Apparently his wife had carried on driving even though several lights had "flashed up".

When we drained the "oil" it didn't seem quite right so we sent it for analysis - it had the consistency of water... turns out it had less lubrication properties than water..... To top it off the oil "filter" fitted was a chinese copy and had no actual filter inside, it was simply a metal case and a seal.

He saved himself £85 on the service and cost himself around £10k for a new engine - car is 2 years old.......

Manufacturer understandably won't pay as the oil was totally wrong. Dealer he took it to is saying we've put that oil in and it's not the oil he put in and is denying liability. The owner doesn't have a spare £10k so his car sits in a workshop unrepaired with no engine....... He has way more finance on it than it's worth without an engine and he doesn't know where to turn.

But he saved £85 on the service.......

Moral of the tale - I would say always use an insurer who is recommended by those who've claimed on theirs - I claimed on GJW Direct and they were brilliant, doubt I'd use anyone else now even if they were a couple of quid more.

Remember Ruskin's famous quote:-

“It is unwise to pay too much, but it is unwise to pay too little.

When you pay too much you lose a little money and that is all.

But when you pay too little you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought isn’t capable of doing the thing it was bought to do.

The common law of business prohibits you from paying too little and receiving a lot – it can't be done.

If you deal with the lowest bidder it would be as well to add something for the risk you run, and if you can do that you can afford to buy something better.

There is hardly anything in the world today that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who buy on price alone are this man’s lawful prey”

John Ruskin 1819 – 1900

I believe this is as true for insurance (and perhaps more so) than most other things!

Or..... "You get what you pay for".
 
ontheplane said:
We had a customer had a service at a "non genuine" dealer because at £230 ours was "too dear". He saved £85
-
When his car was towed in with an "odd noise then the engine stopped" we began investigation as it was still under warranty. Apparently his wife had carried on driving even though several lights had "flashed up".

When we drained the "oil" it didn't seem quite right so we sent it for analysis - it had the consistency of water... turns out it had less lubrication properties than water..... To top it off the oil "filter" fitted was a chinese copy and had no actual filter inside, it was simply a metal case and a seal.

He saved himself £85 on the service and cost himself around £10k for a new engine - car is 2 years old.......

Manufacturer understandably won't pay as the oil was totally wrong. Dealer he took it to is saying we've put that oil in and it's not the oil he put in and is denying liability. The owner doesn't have a spare £10k so his car sits in a workshop unrepaired with no engine....... He has way more finance on it than it's worth without an engine and he doesn't know where to turn.

But he saved £85 on the service.......

Moral of the tale - I would say always use an insurer who is recommended by those who've claimed on theirs - I claimed on GJW Direct and they were brilliant, doubt I'd use anyone else now even if they were a couple of quid more.

Remember Ruskin's famous quote:-

“It is unwise to pay too much, but it is unwise to pay too little.

When you pay too much you lose a little money and that is all.

But when you pay too little you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought isn’t capable of doing the thing it was bought to do.

The common law of business prohibits you from paying too little and receiving a lot – it can't be done.

If you deal with the lowest bidder it would be as well to add something for the risk you run, and if you can do that you can afford to buy something better.

There is hardly anything in the world today that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who buy on price alone are this man’s lawful prey”

John Ruskin 1819 – 1900

I believe this is as true for insurance (and perhaps more so) than most other things!

Or..... "You get what you pay for".
Click to expand...

Yep, opted for the Nav and Gen policy today.

Interesting to hear of your experience with GJW - very nearly went with them but for an odd clause relating to machinery and heavy weather that appears to contradict the main heavy weather clause. I asked and got a response that answered my query but they didn’t really address the contradiction fully and it seems it would depend on what the claims team think. Perhaps I was being risk averse.
.
 
Greg2 said:
Yep, opted for the Nav and Gen policy today.

”it seems it would depend on what the claims team think. Perhaps I was being risk averse.”
.
Click to expand...
Exactly!
I have been banging on about this for ages on here re insurance threads .
Particularly the leaving it unattended @ anchor .
A lot think they are covered Reading like you have done the wiffle waffle weasel words .But just ask ?
Craft insure have it written in FWIW

Not wanting to hijack this but despite what’s written under “ All risks “ in other policies silent on the unattended @ anchor thingy , when you ask them , the claims team suggest it’s unreasonable to leave it unattended out of line of sight ( so eliminating back streets ) or rtn within 1/2 hr …what ever that supposed to measure / indicate ?? .
They say they can’t write up every claim scenario and will look at every ( big total losses ) claim individually .

Anyhow the claims history payout and whats written in , NOT what’s silent and thus assumed drops into the dustbin of “ all risks “ is the way to go.
+ Ruskins Quote ^^ .

Sounds like you picked as of July 2022 the best fit the nearest sq peg in the round hole for your requirements. (y)

Obviously if you are a senior partner in a top London hot shot chamber then you are looking at this through different eyes and any future conflicts will be water off a ducks back especially if written on your practice letterhead……for free !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top