Pantaenius Insurance

Small plug for Y Yacht insurance. Full consequential cover the same as pants. A bit cheaper as their overheads are lower, a surprising number of us on the forum are customers.
 
Lazy Kipper said:
Small plug for Y Yacht insurance. Full consequential cover the same as pants. A bit cheaper as their overheads are lower, a surprising number of us on the forum are customers.
Click to expand...

I completely agree that the cover from Y is good however when I was close to using them I did some research into who was behind them. At the time, probably still, they used a Lloyd's underwriting syndicate so I looked into their loss adjusting process. The people used here were the same as by a couple of much less well regarded boat insurance outfits and as I said in the OP the proof is in the settlement of a claim.
I was unconvinced that with loss adjusters like this it would be a painless experience. All purely IMVHO but the reason why I am still with Pants.
 
Vanilla said:
Sorry to hear that Doris, and sorry for slight thread drift, but wondered if your boat was struck while in Haslar? I know a Sigma got fried there some weeks ago, but thought they were the only ones? Good luck fixing her
Click to expand...

Yes, was in Haslar when the strike happened. The Sigma got the direct hit and I, together with several around me, got the secondary waves. No melted mast etc but lots of bits and pieces of the electronics fried. Was very pleased I was told about the strike otherwise I would have been scratching my head for ages trying to work out why assorted stuff was dead.

I've never heard of a strike like that in a UK marina but apparently it's not uncommon. God bless insurance cover.
 
Regarding Pantaenius' requirement for a vessel to be checked every 28 days (monthly). I would not be surprised for that to be in most if not all policies whether the boat is afloat or ashore.

My boat winters ashore but I know the marina staff inspect all vessel moorings on a daily basis (winter and summer). If I am home and worried during bad weather they will make a special visit to check for me and report back by phone. I have no experience of other marinas; what do other forumites expect at their marinas?
I don't think this happens at my marina just because it is across the river from the Pantaenius offices.:)
 
theoldsalt said:
Regarding Pantaenius' requirement for a vessel to be checked every 28 days (monthly). I would not be surprised for that to be in most if not all policies whether the boat is afloat or ashore.

My boat winters ashore but I know the marina staff inspect all vessel moorings on a daily basis (winter and summer). If I am home and worried during bad weather they will make a special visit to check for me and report back by phone. I have no experience of other marinas; what do other forumites expect at their marinas?
I don't think this happens at my marina just because it is across the river from the Pantaenius offices.:)
Click to expand...

Hi, it was was not a requirement in my old GJW Insurance, but it could have changed now of course. It would be interesting to find out what other insurance companies say about it. Marinas I have been in in the med have done checks around the marina, but it is very much just checking ropes are secure etc. No checks of stop cocks etc
But just to clear up the ambiguity then, as Pantaenius Policy is not clear on this, what constitutes a sufficient check for the purposes of this clause. Also do they need it written down some where it was checked, by whom, when and what the check consisted of. Would they accept for example that it was done as part of the routine marina checks even if no record was kept. A genuine enquiry as I would possibly be interested in Pants insurance in the future but not until those questions were clarified - many thanks
 
Last edited:
It did surprise me that my marina did not ask for proof of insurance nor ask for a spare access key for use in an emergency but I provided one anyway. As for checking seacocks, well maybe that is somewhat OTT but I do know that there have been occasions when an external inspection noted a vessel low in the water which was then lifted ashore for an emergency inspection presumably during the owner's absence.
 
The 28 days exclusion clause on my Pants policy reads:
Sinking resulting from gradual water ingress when the Vessel is left unattended and un-inspected for a period exceeding 28 days.
Click to expand...

That is certainly not a deal breaker for me. So how long do the Pants detractors believe a boat should be left between inspections?
 
awol said:
The 28 days exclusion clause on my Pants policy reads:

That is certainly not a deal breaker for me. So how long do the Pants detractors believe a boat should be left between inspections?
Click to expand...
Depends on how far you are from the boat and that they mean by inspection; a casual glance or getting in and checking for water.
 
Camelia said:
Depends on how far you are from the boat and that they mean by inspection; a casual glance or getting in and checking for water.
Click to expand...
Then why not ask them? In my case, on my swinging mooring or in the marina I use, I know the boat is eye-balled every day and dropping below her marks from "gradual water ingress" would be noticed and acted on.
 
doris said:
Some people like to knock Pantaenius but the test of any insurer is when a claim arrives. They have proved to be terrific.

I got the side effects of a lightning strike in November resulting in significant electrical damage. What with Chriistmas etc it took a while getting estimates and surveys sorted. I received the emailed estimate at 14.15 last Thursday and forwarded it onto Pantaenius. I followed up with a phone call at 16.00. A few questions and by 16.30 I had written approval to go ahead. The electrical engineers wanted 75% up front, that arrived in their bank this morning.

Difficult to imagine anything Pants could have done to improve the service, absolutely first class. I could go cheaper elsewhere but the proof of the pudding.........
Needs to be told.
Click to expand...



3 years ago I had the boat broken into in consecutive winters whilst on a swinging mooring - I sent the receipts in for the stolen items and received a cheque back by return. They even paid for 1 item that I had lost the receipt for.

No danger of me moving away from them.
 
Pants I always found them helpful been with them 16 years,but not so sure know.I received my renewal in December and they brought to my attention a policy clause requiring me to check the boat ever 28 days.Whilst the boat was in the UK not a problem.
The boat is now in Spain.
Called them and said won't be back till mid February and would put scheme in place to record visits similar to my home in the UK.
Ask if they would give me the opportunity or they might be flexible to wait till then.
Have a guess they would not.So moved to Y insurance.
 
Twister_Ken said:
I'm also with Pants, and have also been canvassed by Saga. Saga were considerably more expensive and had much more restrictive T&Cs.

Asked Pants at LBS about extending cover further south - currently my limit is La Rochelle. No problem and no extra charge, although they might want to look at increasing the excess.
Click to expand...

I've always had a good deal from Saga, though having camper and car as well as boat probably helps and not having made a claim on any for 20years ticks their computer's boxes. Having said that, they don't offer vehicle cover for business use so lost one policy to NFU.
 
theoldsalt said:
V1701 said:
Yachting 24 (online provider) are also underwritten by Pants, I found them very reasonable cost wise & not requiring a survey for the more mature craft. Several reports of good claims handling on here...
Click to expand...
Pantanaenius are not underwriters, see http://www.pantaenius.co.uk/en/about-pantaenius/our-insurance-service.html
Click to expand...
I believe Yachting24 is an on-line subsidiary of Pantaenius UK. Unlike the parent company they accept coverage without a survey for vessels of known class - up to a certain age and for a certain period. I wrote of my (positive) experience with them here: http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?385634-Insurance-without-a-survey&p=4593389#post4593389
 
I started a claim with them on Friday morning for a mast damaged during road transport.

I had a call Friday afternoon from a surveyor who had been instructed to inspect mast, very impressed with the speed and professionalism so far.

I hope all gets sorted quickly and that the insurance company of the t*at that damaged the mast pays up so I don't end up paying 30% of the price of a new mast plus other costs!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top