Marine Insurance Consultants, What Should They Do?

[firstspirit]

The title should be self explanatory.

However, in conjuction with FIRSTSPIRIT other posting, Qualified or Not, What Would You Do? , I seek to clarify public opinion.

So, What do marina insurance consultants do,? What is their service to you as a customer? What formal procedure should they adopt in the event of a claim being logged thru them? Are they regulated? Is there an ombudsman or something similar that they have to answer to, in the event of a complaint being made against their practice?...etc. etc..


I would LOVE to hear from you! (Marine Insurance Consultants Too!)

Regards,


Firstspirit.

 

[david_e]

The answer is self explanatory in the title. Another way of simplifying any role like this is to ask - "What does 2 + 2 equal?" Now tell me the answer to this question.

 

[poter]

I agree David. I also feel that FS postings, are now getting to be more than somewhat patronising.


poter.

 

[AndrewB]

Firstspirit could be dealing with a Loss Adjuster, who might well be hiding behind such a title. In which case I sympathise, as they are about the most aggrevating people imaginable to deal with in these cases. Put in by the insurance company in the guise of 'impartial experts', to manoevre you in honeyed tones out of getting decent recompense from the insurance you've paid for and trusted.

(Apologies to any CILA members out there. I'm sure you'll put me right.)

 

[charles_reed]

What do you mean by a Marine Insurance Consultant?

I am familiar with Brokers, with Underwriters and with Loss Adjusters.

However I suspect the "Marine Insurance Consultant" to be a mythological beast such as the gryphon or the unicorn - no doubt it even behaves like the Liver Bird.

 

[david_e]

Which in essence is my point Andrew. 2 + 2 to most people = 4. When asked by the man who pays the piper the answer is "what would you like it to add up to?" Old one I know but for me just about sums it up.

 

[Sinbad1]

I think you will find that they have called themselves 'consultants' becos in the old days they could not refer to themselves as 'brokers' unless they belonged to a specific governing body. This has now changed but...they will have continued with the old name.

They will have provided you with a quotation for marine insurance and you will have accepted that quotation and arranged the policy via them. Their ongoing obligations will depend on whether you have a separate service contract or not. Its very unlikely. Thus if you have a claim they will either pass you direct to the underwriters/insurers to allow you to log the claim and deal direct, or if they are a big company, they may well have an in house claims dept which will assist with your claim.

Note however that their responsibility is to have you effectively covered under your policy. If you feel that someone else is at fault it certainly isn't their responsibility to take action on your behalf aginst negligent third parties. Your insurers will do this if they have to pay out on your policy and it was obviously negligence on someone elses part.

From your posts you obviously have an issue which you feel that someone else should take responsibility. I suggest that you get your boat repaired under your policy and let your insurers take the matter up to recover their costs. It will save you lots of hassle.

 

[AndrewB]

But it sounds like the problem ....

... is that Firstspirit's insurers don't necessarily believe there is a problem! That's why I think this 'Marine Consultant' may be a Loss Adjuster sent in by the insurers.

I sympathise with Firstspirit, since if I understand him correctly, he faces a dilemma. He can't prove a problem without a hull survey. But his marina can't do a liftout so the boat can't be surveyed where it stands. If he takes the boat elsewhere to be lifted, then (a) if its damaged, such a trip could be foolhardy; and (b) if damage is then found, it becomes increasingly hard to prove it was specifically due to this grounding.

Unfortunately Firstspirit seems to have got badly on the wrong side of his marina. A natural reaction of course if he felt justifiably aggrieved by what they did, but poor policy in terms of getting his problem solved. His real battle though will probably be with his own insurers.

 

[firstspirit]

Dear david e

Thank you for your posting.

Perhaps my questions are placed without experience and for that I can only offer an apology, I am sorry.

If I understand you correctly it sounds as if my question states the obvious, it is meant to, consultants? , why they should consult! But what does that actually mean?

Firstspirit admits total ignorance on this subject and seeks exactly what can be expected from an engagement with an insurance consultant, at every level, including processing a claim should the need arise and if the consutant is the chosen route to pursue a claim, what also can be expected, in detail, from the consultant?

Is verbal communication received by the consultant from the insurers, which is then reported back to the claimant, sufficient for the claimant to get 'out of pocket' or spend money? That's what I am trying to find out.

Please tell me what it is that you want from Firstspirit, other than the name of the parties involved, as this has already been discussed, and I will do my best to address your queries. I have no training for this endeavour so your advice is most welcome.

Regards,

Firstspirit

 

[firstspirit]

Dear Poter,

Would I be correct in saying that you are frustrated because I have not yet named and shamed the parties involved or perhaps and even better still, you can tell me of your experience in a similar circumstance, so that I may learn from you.

Regards,

Firstspirit.

 

[firstspirit]

AndrewB Thank you for your posting,

In relation to this skipper and vessel the following has transpired: It can be difficult to follow, but there is no easier way of telling you!

The consultant was informed of the original incident by the skipper and advice sought.

In turn, the consultant informed the insurers and the loss adjusters.

The consultant then informed the claimant that he has received VERBAL communication that it is ok to proceed with an estimate for diving contractors to be brought in.

Remember, this is the first claim ever that this skipper has made.

TIME PASSES....................

The skipper is concerned that nothing is being done and contacts the insurers directly, he is worried that the underside of the vessel may be damaged.

Out of the blue, the consultant contacts the claimant and states that the insurers have been in touch with them and he just can't understand it, as the matter has become dormant, as a result of no response to the earlier proposal.

WHAT PROPOSAL? THINKS THE SKIPPER.

So, when a consultant says he has received VERBAL communication from the inurers, that they are prepared to receive a quotation from a diving contractor to perform an examination of the vessel's wetted area, what is the position of the claimant?

Should he proceed on second hand verbal communication, any ideas?
That is where the issue for this skipper and crew has stoped.

Regards,

Firstspirit.

 

[firstspirit]

Dear Charles Reed,

Not a Dinosaur, not a Do-Do, but I would like to assure you they really do exist. At your own leisure try a search MARINE INSURANCE CONSULTANTS, on any engine and you will find them.

Thanks for your posting though,

Regards,

Firstspirit.

 

[firstspirit]

Thank you Sinbad1 for your posting.

The points you have raised are most helpful. I must stress certain matters here. The marina company would be delighted if this vessel was to leave their premises and in light of the grounding incident have expressed that they will use whatever force necessary to enforce the vessels' removal from their property. Perhaps they are worried that at some future point in time, the vessel hull and general integrity may be in question, which all points back to the heavy grounding incident in the first place.

No damaged has yet to be observed but we are talking about the underside of the hull, the wetted area. Accordingly, an extensive diving operation may be necessary or preferably, a slip or haul out, to confirm that no damage has been incurred.

The marina has deliberately withdrawn the lift out area for such operations. The vessel is large, over 50 feet, weighs about 35-40 tonnes and no facility exists in this present marina to inspect the underside of the vessel. As things stand, It would have to be taken elswhere many miles away which poses further questions about insurance risks etc.

The consultant has advised this skipper that in the situation where damage has not been identified, he suggests that the skipper and crew "BURY THE MARINE INSURANCE APPROACH!". IS THIS PROFESSIONAL ADVICE FROM A MARINE INSURANCE CONSULTANT? Furthermore, the consultant expresses an opinion, which was not asked for, that- if you are fighting a battle to remain in situ "YOU SHOULD DROP THE GROUNDING INCIDENT!".

This skipper is hopping mad and intimidated by the apparent cynical nature of those involved, but I can confirm, this skipper is also resolute. It may be to the posters of this and other forums that Firstspirit may seek direct help in relation to this situation.

Regards,

Firstspirit.

 

[firstspirit]

Re: But it sounds like the problem ....

AndrewB,

Thankyou for seeing the points so clearly. Excellent! I am not sure how the skipper could possiblly be considered to have gotten on the wrong side of the marina operator though.

Firstspirit has tried and tried to use all means of diplomacy to resolve this confict in meeting after meeting, only to be effectively told get out.

Intimidatory and discriminatory pressure has been applied to this vessel and her crew since this incident and overseen by the MD of the company.

As you say, it may well be the claimants own insurers who are the biggest problem still to emerge although Firstspirit believes that the marina company must still be seen to be acting responsibly for this incident originally.

Thank you.

Regards,

Firstspirit.

 

[Guest]

Having had serious loss through theft in the past on a boat - I found that the Brokers, a VERY VERY well known company that advertise in the mags etc. 'washed' their hands of any involvement in the claim and passed me direct to the underwriters. Of course the underwriters in true style only accpet fax communication and this dragged the whole episode out to nearly a year !

I questioned the brokers as to their stand and that they had an obligation to look after their clients interests - they had received commision from the premium and that as far as I am concerned made them answerable to me. Their answer was totally unsatisfactory and I told them so. They immediately cancelled my coverage and advised me to seek cover elsewhere. I then contacted the Ombudsman who was unable to help ......

So who's to help when you really need them ?

The Brokers I have now have been fair and I have no reason to question them, having advised them completely of the 'others' attitude etc.

Consultants .... it is a term that is blatantly misused by so many and misunderstood by the rest !!!!

 

[Guest]

What about soliciting support from others ?

What about soliciting support from other Marina berth-holders ? Petitioning the Operators, calling in the Office of Fair Trading ?

There are avenues available that may just bring about some action .... have you tried local press ? what about Watchdog ?

If they are trying tactics to get you out - then you have to stay CLEAN and absolutely stay where you are ... unless the boat can be moved under 'official observed and verified' circumstances.... but first I would want a decalration by the marina operators that any damage found and attributed to the episode is their responsibility.

A situation that seems doomed - unless such as OFT or similar is involved.

I do not believe in my years as Surveyor / Professional Marine that the Insurers will sort it out ... unfortunately unlike Auto Insurance, marine insurance seems to spend most of its time trying to get out of liabilities / claims etc. (Smack 2 cars together and they settle .... smack 2 boats together and you can both lose !)

A very sorry state of affairs.

 

[Guest]

Loss adjustor / asssessor / consultants

Loss Adjustor ..... to reduce all liabilities for the insurer by whatever means possible
Loss assessor ..... to accurately assess the financial claim and affects

Consultant ..... Humbug ! No such animal officially ...... just some person claiming to be and literally no authority to act / force / advise etc. - insurers would generally discount any such animal as far as I am aware !

 

[Sinbad1]

Re: What about soliciting support from others ?

Sorry Nige, but that approach will just annoy the socks of everyone. It is essential that people understand the responsibilities of each party. No one is going to admit any form of liability. To do so can predjudice their own insurance cover.

A broker or a consultant or whatever he calls himself is doing no more than scourcing your insurance for you. His job is to make sure that you get the insurance cover you require and if it turns out that you do not have the cover that you requested and there is a shortfall after a claim, then he has been negligent and will be responsible for that shortfall.

However, your broker/consultant /whatever is NOT responsible for handling your claim. You do not pay him to do this in facy YOU do not pay him at all. He has an agreement with the insurers and it is them who pay him. What he must do is inform the insurers if/when a claim is made. He must do this by whatever manner the insurers have specified.

Today most insurers have a specific 'claims' telephone number and the broker consultant will pass this to the client on claim notification and the client will then provide the insurers directly with the claims details. This speeds the whole process up and is usually most effective. The broker etc does not deal with the claim.

Now, to be called a 'broker' as in insurance broker, requires belonging to a trade organisation called BIBA. This was the British Insurance Brokers Association and the prime prerequisite was to have some basic qualifications and to pay them a healthy annual fee. People avoided this rather blatant closed shop operation by styling themselves as something other than a broker.

Ok 'nuff history.

!st before anyone gets excited about pregnant 1st mates and how bloody frightened everyone was....it must be established if there is any damage. If none, shutup and move on. If some, get it assessed by diver and send a copy of his report direct to the marinas insurers. They will contact the marina and ask what is going on. Forget about being mad/upset/mentally scarred. This is simply a question of alleged negligence and possible damage arising from it. Until the damage possibility is assessed this isn't worth getting involved in.

If free spirit is doing the injured free spirit stuff and is emotionally involved to the point where he can't be objective, then he must drop the matter or pass it to someone else. It will cost nothing to go to a local solicitor and have the whole matter assessed for liability. Do that and you will be able to sleep at nite.

Personally, unless you thrive on this type of hassle and know what you are doing then you are just going to get very stressed and acheive little. Me, I'd put a diver down and then head for the horizon if hull ok. Sod it, lifes too short and health too precious.

 

[Guest]

Re: What about soliciting support from others ?

A well thought out response from a lawyer. Worth re-posting in the other thread(s)

 

[steve_cronin]

Don\'t mess about here if you have a complaint...

.. The General Insurance Standards Council is where you should be heading. www.gisc.co.uk

Telephone:- 0845 601 2857

or online at :- complaints@gisc.co.uk

Steve Cronin