Professional Skipper's liability insurance...recommendations?

[jfm]

If you wanted us to deliver your boat you'd have nothing to worry about! ;-)

But I wouldn't anyway. I insure my boat as I want to. As said above, I get my money if she sinks. It's the delivery crew's insurance that I'm concerned about in this thread. The mere fact an owner client is himself insured does nothing for the delivery crew. Generally, if one tells oneself insurance companies insure their client, not the boat, it will focus the mind better.

Thanks re delivery. I have in mind to email you guys about antibes-Croatia one of these days because I don't have time to diy that one. And I'd get a free pro-quality video in the deal!

 

[jfm]

IIRC, there is no difference between "negligence" & "gross negligence" in Law, perhaps the Barristers on here can advise (pro bono of course).

Yup that is often said of English law but it isn't true of other countries. I still would advise anyone against buying an ins policy where the policy holder has to establish the existence of "proven gross negligence" to get paid, if there's a better alternative.

 

[alant]

Yup that is often said of English law but it isn't true of other countries. I still would advise anyone against buying an ins policy where the policy holder has to establish the existence of "proven gross negligence" to get paid, if there's a better alternative.

I understood "gross negligence" if such exists, to occur when a 'skipper' deliberately hazards the vessel, so not 'accidental'.

 

[[3889]]

I understood "gross negligence" if such exists, to occur when a 'skipper' deliberately hazards the vessel, so not 'accidental'.

I understand that as recklessness, normally described as deliberate damage, which, IME, insurers exclude except in circumstances involving saving human life.
Sadly, I am still entirely at a loss as to whether skippers PL insurance offers anything worthwhile or if it is a PPI-esque white elephant. My gut feeling suggests the latter but, as Carl Sagan said, I don't think with my gut.

 

[Uricanejack]

I wonder if you are asking about the right thing.

Perhaps it should be Indemnity?
If you are hired by a owner directly or by a delivery company or a delivery skipper

Make sure you have some kind of contract. Which makes your status clear.

An example of what should be in the contract or something similar.

a)Except where there has been flagrant or willful negligence on the part of an employee. The company agree not to seek indemnity against an employee who’s actions result in a judgment against the company. And will the company agree to pay any judgment against the employee arising out of the performance of his or her duties. The company agrees to pay any legal costs incurred in the proceedings.

B) criminal actions where an employee is charged with an offence resulting directly from the proper performance of his or her duties and is subsequently found not guilty. The employee shall be reimbursed for reasonable leagal fees.

C) where an employee is called before a hearing held under the merchant shipping act resulting directly from the proper performance oh his or her duties the employee shall be reimbursed for reasonable leagal fees

D) at the option of the company. The company may provide leagal services in defence of any leagal proceedings involving the employee so long as no conflict of interest arises between the company and the employee or pay the leagal fees of council chosen by the employee

E) in order that the above provisions shall be binding upon the company, the employee shall notify the company imeadiatly, in writing of any incident or course of events which may lead to leagal action against him or her. And the intention or knowledge of such possible leagal action is evidenced by any of the following circumstances.

1 when the employee is first approached by any person or organization notifying him or her of any intended leagal action against him or her. Or

2 when the employee him or her SOC requires or retains leagal council in regard to an incident or course of events. Or

3 where any investigative body or authority first notifies the employee of any investigation or other proceedings which may lead to leagal action against the employee. Or

4) when information first becomes known to the employee in light of which it is reasonable assumption that the employee would conclude that she or he might be the object of leagal action. Or

5) when the employee receives notice of any leagal proceedings of any nature or kind.

Then you will be covered by the insurance of the person or company who hired you.

If you are the company. Then make sure your insurance provides leagal defence for your company. Yourself and your employees

Getting cover which will actually cover you for gross flagrant criminal or pretty much any thing other than some very minor negligent is probably very unlikely.

Leagal defence cover can be expensive but can be through associations like professionals associations, unions, or the rather questionable cover through in my case the CYA or perhaps the RYA.

Doctors and Lawyers get thier cover through thier professional associations.

I don’t know if nautilus or whatever they are called this week will accept delivery skippers. But I have seen them advertising the benefits of membership to yacht crew with yacht master I think three mean super yacht. but who knows.

 

[[3889]]

I wonder if you are asking about the right thing.

Perhaps it should be Indemnity?
If you are hired by a owner directly or by a delivery company or a delivery skipper

Make sure you have some kind of contract. Which makes your status clear.

An example of what should be in the contract or something similar.

a)Except where there has been flagrant or willful negligence on the part of an employee. The company agree not to seek indemnity against an employee who’s actions result in a judgment against the company. And will the company agree to pay any judgment against the employee arising out of the performance of his or her duties. The company agrees to pay any legal costs incurred in the proceedings.

B) criminal actions where an employee is charged with an offence resulting directly from the proper performance of his or her duties and is subsequently found not guilty. The employee shall be reimbursed for reasonable leagal fees.

C) where an employee is called before a hearing held under the merchant shipping act resulting directly from the proper performance oh his or her duties the employee shall be reimbursed for reasonable leagal fees

D) at the option of the company. The company may provide leagal services in defence of any leagal proceedings involving the employee so long as no conflict of interest arises between the company and the employee or pay the leagal fees of council chosen by the employee

E) in order that the above provisions shall be binding upon the company, the employee shall notify the company imeadiatly, in writing of any incident or course of events which may lead to leagal action against him or her. And the intention or knowledge of such possible leagal action is evidenced by any of the following circumstances.

1 when the employee is first approached by any person or organization notifying him or her of any intended leagal action against him or her. Or

2 when the employee him or her SOC requires or retains leagal council in regard to an incident or course of events. Or

3 where any investigative body or authority first notifies the employee of any investigation or other proceedings which may lead to leagal action against the employee. Or

4) when information first becomes known to the employee in light of which it is reasonable assumption that the employee would conclude that she or he might be the object of leagal action. Or

5) when the employee receives notice of any leagal proceedings of any nature or kind.

Then you will be covered by the insurance of the person or company who hired you.

If you are the company. Then make sure your insurance provides leagal defence for your company. Yourself and your employees

Getting cover which will actually cover you for gross flagrant criminal or pretty much any thing other than some very minor negligent is probably very unlikely.

Leagal defence cover can be expensive but can be through associations like professionals associations, unions, or the rather questionable cover through in my case the CYA or perhaps the RYA.

Doctors and Lawyers get thier cover through thier professional associations.

I don’t know if nautilus or whatever they are called this week will accept delivery skippers. But I have seen them advertising the benefits of membership to yacht crew with yacht master I think three mean super yacht. but who knows.

Yeah..... I started doing deliveries because I like sailing. At first I offered my services gratis but no one took me seriously. Now I charge market rate and get all the work I want but I really don't want this BS. Golf is starting to look more appealing by the minute.

 

[Uricanejack]

Yeah..... I started doing deliveries because I like sailing. At first I offered my services gratis but no one took me seriously. Now I charge market rate and get all the work I want but I really don't want this BS. Golf is starting to look more appealing by the minute.

I didn’t think of all the stuff above by myself I copied from an old contract I had laying around. Planes , Trains and Automobiles.
Drive professionally there will be some kind of similar risks and requirements. This comes from a maritime company and refers to vessels but laungauge like this is common place. From small work boat to enormous cruise ship. The people working on them are covered by the company for almost all normal situations.

The odd ones where negligence with a prefix or criminal act occur. You would probably be more concerned about staying clear of the slammer than bieng taken to court. Companies don’t usual sue thier employees.

I think conventional insurance is going to be enough 99.9 percent of the time. The other little bit you need good representation so leagal defence cover rather than cover for being negligent.

I suspect part of the mess the unfortunate pair in the case in question got into.
The friend didn’t have a clear contract with the owner or the company yet he received payment even though it was small.
So an informal deal went sour. The insurance company probably had very good leagal advice and the poor chap on his own didn’t.
Plus he was deemed negligent. By the court.
So it cost him.
Many of us could be found negligent in our daily working life or possibly even in many of our routine pass times where we don’t think about it.
In most cases if you are acting on behalf of a company, club. Society or other organization you are covered by the organization you are acting for.
Most business have cover in case of civil law suits against them and or thier employees.

So if it’s something you enjoy doing. Worrying about getting sued for negligence shouldn’t be a big problem.
First don’t be negligent.
Second make sure you know you have a proper contract in place if silver is going to cross your palm.

 

[alant]

I didn’t think of all the stuff above by myself I copied from an old contract I had laying around. Planes , Trains and Automobiles.
Drive professionally there will be some kind of similar risks and requirements. This comes from a maritime company and refers to vessels but laungauge like this is common place. From small work boat to enormous cruise ship. The people working on them are covered by the company for almost all normal situations.

The odd ones where negligence with a prefix or criminal act occur. You would probably be more concerned about staying clear of the slammer than bieng taken to court. Companies don’t usual sue thier employees.

I think conventional insurance is going to be enough 99.9 percent of the time. The other little bit you need good representation so leagal defence cover rather than cover for being negligent.

I suspect part of the mess the unfortunate pair in the case in question got into.
The friend didn’t have a clear contract with the owner or the company yet he received payment even though it was small.
So an informal deal went sour. The insurance company probably had very good leagal advice and the poor chap on his own didn’t.
Plus he was deemed negligent. By the court.
So it cost him.
Many of us could be found negligent in our daily working life or possibly even in many of our routine pass times where we don’t think about it.
In most cases if you are acting on behalf of a company, club. Society or other organization you are covered by the organization you are acting for.
Most business have cover in case of civil law suits against them and or thier employees.

So if it’s something you enjoy doing. Worrying about getting sued for negligence shouldn’t be a big problem.
First don’t be negligent.
Second make sure you know you have a proper contract in place if silver is going to cross your palm.

So, in the case cited, the value of the boat was covered, but the skipper & crew were not.
So unless they are specifically covered for "negligence", accidental or otherwise, no PL insurance is worth having.
As a skipper, "don't be negligent" is always something likely to happen, not everything is in a human beings control.

 

[jfm]

So, in the case cited, the value of the boat was covered, but the skipper & crew were not.
So unless they are specifically covered for "negligence", accidental or otherwise, no PL insurance is worth having.
As a skipper, "don't be negligent" is always something likely to happen, not everything is in a human beings control.

As said above, it's better to think about this on the footing that insurers don't insure property, they insure people (their clients). In the case of the sunk fairline, the boat owner was insured but the crew were not. Don't ever expect someone else's insurance policy to protect you if you're negligent.
I don't agree Uricanejacks long analysis above but too long to explain in detail.

 

[alant]

As said above, it's better to think about this on the footing that insurers don't insure property, they insure people (their clients). In the case of the sunk fairline, the boat owner was insured but the crew were not. Don't ever expect someone else's insurance policy to protect you if you're negligent.
I don't agree Uricanejacks long analysis above but too long to explain in detail.

The boat in question hadn't been delivered, so the "owner" refused to accept any responsibility.
Think the boat was new & still in hands of the Guernsey Broker. Who got paid out whose was the loss, that's when it gets messy. PBI blamed (as usual).
Agree with "don't ever expect someone else's insurance to protect you", particularly in the case of self emplyed/freelance skippers/instructors. Was told on many occasions by 'reputable' sea schools that instructors were covered on their insurance, but were they? It was this difficult conundrum which finally scared me into retiring.

 

[jfm]

Was told on many occasions by 'reputable' sea schools that instructors were covered on their insurance, but were they? .

In general, no they were not. It's easy to see how this can get mixed up though. As a basic rule, if you have a personal duty not to be negligent then the only insurance that can protect you is a policy that you bought yourself. Don't listen much to anyone who says otherwise

The fairline case was simple. The boat belonged to the fairline jersey dealer PFCI. PFCI suffered the loss. Their own insurers paid them, but as a condition of the insurance PFCI transferred whatever rights they had to the insurer. That included their right to claim from the negligent crew. Thus the insurers were entitled to stand in the shoes of PFCI and in that capacity sued the crew and kept the payout that the crew paid. Thus "the boat was insured" but only so far as PFCI were concerned. PFCI's insurance was of no use to the crew, which is the only point I'm making. People are insured; boats are not.

 

[rotrax]

In general, no they were not. It's easy to see how this can get mixed up though. As a basic rule, if you have a personal duty not to be negligent then the only insurance that can protect you is a policy that you bought yourself. Don't listen much to anyone who says otherwise

The fairline case was simple. The boat belonged to the fairline jersey dealer PFCI. PFCI suffered the loss. Their own insurers paid them, but as a condition of the insurance PFCI transferred whatever rights they had to the insurer. That included their right to claim from the negligent crew. Thus the insurers were entitled to stand in the shoes of PFCI and in that capacity sued the crew and kept the payout that the crew paid. Thus "the boat was insured" but only so far as PFCI were concerned. PFCI's insurance was of no use to the crew, which is the only point I'm making. People are insured; boats are not.

Surely in the case you quote the boat was insured for loss?

Not the crew who were negligent?

So the statement " People are insured; boats are not " must be incorrect. My boat is insured and identified by its HIN, SSR and boat name.

I think I see where you are coming from-the delivery crew who were negligent had no cover for loss due to their negligence.

 

[Uricanejack]

I can see how a delivery skipper can get insurance to cover any damages or loss to boats he is delivering while in his care.
Most insurance policies I have ever seen have an exception for negligence.
They will pay for the loss but make seem to recover from the skipper if he is negligent.

Even your car insurance will probably not cover negligence.

Stupidity covered. negligence not so much.
So who actually provides cover for negligence. Anyone.

 

[rotrax]

I can see how a delivery skipper can get insurance to cover any damages or loss to boats he is delivering while in his care.
Most insurance policies I have ever seen have an exception for negligence.
They will pay for the loss but make seem to recover from the skipper if he is negligent.

Even your car insurance will probably not cover negligence.

Stupidity covered. negligence not so much.
So who actually provides cover for negligence. Anyone.

See my earlier post-#9.

 

[alant]

I can see how a delivery skipper can get insurance to cover any damages or loss to boats he is delivering while in his care.
Most insurance policies I have ever seen have an exception for negligence.
They will pay for the loss but make seem to recover from the skipper if he is negligent.

Even your car insurance will probably not cover negligence.

Stupidity covered. negligence not so much.
So who actually provides cover for negligence. Anyone.

What, is the difference between "stupidity" & "negligence"?
In the case of a car, if I have a momentory loss of judgement & hit another car, or wall etc, am I covered or not?

 

[[3889]]

I can see how a delivery skipper can get insurance to cover any damages or loss to boats he is delivering while in his care.
Most insurance policies I have ever seen have an exception for negligence.
They will pay for the loss but make seem to recover from the skipper if he is negligent.

Even your car insurance will probably not cover negligence.

Stupidity covered. negligence not so much.
So who actually provides cover for negligence. Anyone.

My boat policy doesn't mention negligence. It does state I am covered for all accidental damage, but not deliberate damage caused by me, so I don't see how negligence comes into it.
If, as a delivery skipper, I am named on the boat owner's policy, I can't see how I am not covered by that policy, in the same way that my partner is covered by my car policy.

 

[Uricanejack]

What, is the difference between "stupidity" & "negligence"?
In the case of a car, if I have a momentory loss of judgement & hit another car, or wall etc, am I covered or not?

Probably covered. Just a mistake.

Stupidity. Doing something wrong without knowing or understanding its wrong.

Negligence. Knowing doing something wrong and doing it anyway.

Or not doing something you should because you don’t know you should is stupid.

Not doing something you know you should be doing and choosing to not do it is negligent.

Driving with faulty brakes not knowing there are faulty? stupidity
Diving with faulty brakes knowing they are faulty? negligence.

Same risk of accident one guy unaware of risk the other guys aware of risk chose to drive anyway.

Do you think your car insurance would cover you for knowing you were doing something wrong or not bothering to do something you should reasonably have known you should do.

Or your boat insurance?

 

[Uricanejack]

I probably did not say it very well. I should have said I have never seen any which cover negligence and I have seen some which specifically say they don’t.
Just because your policy doesn’t say we don’t cover negligence doesn’t mean they will cover damage due to negligence.
It does say they accidental damage.

Accidentally doesn’t always include negligent.

 

[alant]

I probably did not say it very well. I should have said I have never seen any which cover negligence and I have seen some which specifically say they don’t.
Just because your policy doesn’t say we don’t cover negligence doesn’t mean they will cover damage due to negligence.
It does say they accidental damage.

Accidentally doesn’t always include negligent.

That's a matter of opinion.

 

[jfm]

Surely in the case you quote the boat was insured for loss?

Not the crew who were negligent?

So the statement " People are insured; boats are not " must be incorrect. My boat is insured and identified by its HIN, SSR and boat name.

I think I see where you are coming from-the delivery crew who were negligent had no cover for loss due to their negligence.

I'm not incorrect. Your first three paras are incorrect then you make a U turn in your 4th para and get it correct. With respect to your sentence " My boat is insured..." it is as I say clearer in this context to say that YOU are insured