What Does Insurance Cover You For?

J

jeffsnox

New Member
Joined
24 Jul 2007
Messages
19
Visit site
I've had a survey done on a Westerly Centaur I'm considering buying.

The survey showed up a few issues, but said the boat should be fine for a year or two without major works, so long as a few small issues are resolved.

If I was to buy this boat and resolve those small issues... and get some insurance... what, in terms of failure on this yacht, am I covered for?

For example:

If the mast was to break - would that be covered?

If the engine blew up on me, would that be?

The boat has "a small amount of seepage at the port keel bolts"... if this became a LARGE amount of seepage and flooded the boat - would this be covered?

Some osmosis was noted, but no major blistering or delamination... and I was told that if I dry the boat annually, it could potentially remain sound for many years... what if next season, the hull explodes with blisters??


Basically, does survey+insurance mean I can purchase this boat without too much to worry about? Or am I going out on a limb a bit?

THANKS!!
 
The insurance company might insist that some of the items found by the survey are rectified but you can shop around for insurance. Third pary only insurance is a possibility.

Generally insurance would cover a dismasting (but probably not if they could claim that you knew the rigging was overdue for replacement )

Not likely to cover mechanical failure of the engine. (does your car insurance?)

Beware of seepage in the vicinity of keel bolts on Centaurs. It could be a warning of the well known Centaur keel loss syndrone. If the insurance co know that you know it is leaking then a keel falls off then they will resist paying out. That is an area which should be fully investigated and the hull strengthened around the keels if necessary (Vital if it has been or will be kept on a mooring where it dries to mud.)

Remdial work for osmosis will be at your expense (does your car insurance cover you for rust?) and some insurance companies insist that it is done!

Negotiate a price that takes all the defects into consideration.
 
[ QUOTE ]
what, in terms of failure on this yacht, am I covered for?

For example:

If the mast was to break - would that be covered?

[/ QUOTE ]Depends on why the mast failed. Where you racing? were you insured for racing? was it due to a rigging failure? when was the rigging last replaced?[ QUOTE ]
If the engine blew up on me, would that be?

[/ QUOTE ]Probably not. If your car engine "blew up" would you expect your car insurance to fork out? Again when was it serviced, why did it "blow up", cooling failure, old age, lack of lubrication etc[ QUOTE ]
The boat has "a small amount of seepage at the port keel bolts"... if this became a LARGE amount of seepage and flooded the boat - would this be covered?

[/ QUOTE ]Probably not. If the surveyor found "a small amount of seepage at the port keel bolts" you would be expected to have that rectified and resurveyed. I personally would not be happy going to sea in a boat that I knew had leaking keel bolts, leaks tend ot get worse, not better.[ QUOTE ]
Some osmosis was noted, but no major blistering or delamination... and I was told that if I dry the boat annually, it could potentially remain sound for many years... what if next season, the hull explodes with blisters??

[/ QUOTE ]I don't know of any insurance company that would pay out for osmosis treatment.[ QUOTE ]
Basically, does survey+insurance mean I can purchase this boat without too much to worry about? Or am I going out on a limb a bit?

[/ QUOTE ]'fraid not, either use the survey report to knock the price down and use the "savings" to have all the problems professionally rectified then get a new survey or walk away.

What you are actually saying is you want to buy a boat with known "issues" as noted by a surveyor then you want your insurance company to pay to fix them or fix the subsequent damage.

Tom
 
Although insurance will do what it says on the tin, there is something a bit unsound about the idea of accepting defects in a boat in the hope that they should be covered by insurance. There are circumstances in which each of the defects you mention could result in loss of life and while some defects are acceptable and even inevitable on an older boat, I wouldn't want to be at sea in an unsound craft, whatever the insurance.
 
Any defect that the insurance company knows about will be used in defence of them not paying out. Call me a cynic, but this is why they ask for a survey. Kermudjon makes sound points.

My Centaur had several defects, most of which have now been seen to. The insurance company wasnt interested in knowing that the work had been done, but boy would they if a claim was made.
 
Call me a cynic, but the principle of insurance these days seems to be that if anything happens it is because there was something wrong and is thus not insured. To give two examples:
1. My mast (on my previous boat) broke when sailing with genoa only in a force four. The insurance company had it inspected and concluded that, as it was 24 years old it had reached the end of its useful life. They did pay out, but not for the complete cost of renewal, only for the resulting cost of new rigging as it was not possible to get a mast that would use the old stuff.
2. The covering of the flat roof on part of the house blew off. Again the story was that the weather had not been extreme and the loss was due to "lack of maintainance" and not covered, despite the evidence that it had been inspected and repaired the previous year (at my own expense) and the streets were littered with bits of roof from other buildings.

I do remember the abuses of insurance from the days when I could not get insurance on my old 6-metre. This surprised me because the local 8-metre owners had a "mast-droppers club" and wore a tie with a broken mast motif! They would be lucky to get the cost of the tie today.
 
There is always a danger that an insurer will refuse to pay out for anything associated or caused by a known pre-existing defect. The safest thing is to send the survey report to the insurer with your comments - e.g. repaired, will do over the next winter, etc.

On one occasion (with a Centaur, actually), I asked the surveyor to confirm in writing what he had told me at the time of the survey, which was that seepage from keel bolts was not a structural problem. The surveyor initially refused but I asked him why he would say one thing to my face and put another thing in his report. He obliged in the end and had he not, his name would have been circulated around a wide circle of local yachtsmen.

From my experience of them Pantaenius are good, so were GJW for the UK, why not ask them what you should do? One thing is for sure, keeping relevant facts from your insurer is NOT the way to go!

SeaStart used to be a really excellent service and I would recommend it on the south coast. It is the AA of boating. I say 'used' only because we have been out of the UK for three years and things change, but they had a superb customer service ethos.

As for your keel bolts, you probably know that keel stiffeners were a required retro-fit to earlier Centaurs (and later ones have mostly been modified as well). Usually the problem is benign and can be lived with until it is convenient to drop the keels if you can put up with the loss of that port locker - one of the best lockers on the boat.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Generally insurance would cover a dismasting (but probably not if they could claim that you knew the rigging was overdue for replacement )

[/ QUOTE ]

Pantaenius have expressly agreed to pay 50% of a claim caused by rigging failure on my boat, due to it being over 10 years old.

Whilst not ideal, it is now a known, and I am willing to live with it untill I can afford to replace the rigging.
 
I once turned an Enterprise mast banana shaped whilst racing. My then insurers were General Accident and had a cheque in the post within ten days of my submitting the claim form. I rang them and told the honest truth about the incident, and they said it was OK.

A couple of years earlier I insured my car for a foreign friend to drive on a visit to the UK. She crashed it into another car within an hour of the insurance commencing. General Accident (again) paid out without batting an eyelid. That was the early 1980s .

I also had a sailboard stolen from a dinghy compound at Leeds Sailing club in about 1987. That was paid out no trouble as well.

You can't expect new for old unless the policy says so. It will pay out the value of your property

I do know that insurers have become a lot more nitpicking, but I can only suggest that you read any policy carefully, not only for what is insured, but for the section saying what is not, and if you are still not sure, at least ring and ask them.

There has been a number of rejected insurance claims noted in PBO where the MD of Pantaenius has taken the time to write and say that under their policy it would have been covered, so there is a good starting point for you.

I'm with Saga, who initially demanded a survey, then after I had the survey, said they did not need one /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif i'm probably going to look elsewhere next year as they are quite limiting in some ways.

Tim
 
All the items you mention would be down to you in the conditions you describe. Insurance only covers what's specified, and there are generally lots of exclusions. In your case I would expect a moderate excess to be imposed. If the rigging is not demonstrably younger than 10-12 years, you will face problems in case of a claim for shoud(s) parting.

Is all this worth it in this case? Propbably not - I think we are about to enter a buyer's market, and you can get a boat of this vintage with a better pedigree. Don't be tempted to think that having paid for the survey you might as well go ahead...bad thinking!

When you come to sell it, your purchaser will be asking all the same questions, and the condition of the boat will then be a couple or more seasons older. What prospects would you say you had?

There's an awful lot of tat hanging around in yards all over the country, masquerading as a "good buy!". I say that if the owner has not gone to the trouble of keeping the boat in trim and dealing with issues as they arise, why should you be glad to take on this duty?

PWG
 
I agree 100%. For some reason people will happily(?) lose 1/2 the value of a new car in 3 years, but expect some old dog of a boat to appreciate in value.

The truth is that many boats are scrap and people still want top dollar for them.

The fact that they still float seems to make them worth money.
 
I am aware of insurance companies here apparently happily paying up for mast broken due to rigging failure (several examples) or engine rebuild due to failure of the cooling system. Perhaps they are more generous here and simply raise the rates for everyone to cover the cost.
In each case an assessor who seemed to know his stuff came to look at the damage and the cause.

You of course have a moral responsibility to do everything you can to avert damage and you may come unstuck if you try to diddle them.
good luck olewill
 
The main reason for marine insurance is Third Party cover... If you cause an incident that results in a 250,000 tonne tanker going aground, the 5mill 3rd party may come in handy....
 
[ QUOTE ]
The main reason for marine insurance is Third Party cover... If you cause an incident that results in a 250,000 tonne tanker going aground, the 5mill 3rd party may come in handy....

[/ QUOTE ]Maybe for some, but when you've got a couple of hundred thousand invested in your yacht, third party cover is very much the secondary reason for marine insurance. Indeed, one looks very carefully at what is insured, and what isn't.
 
Insurance cover varies between companies and you have to read each proposal in detail to see what is covered. This is especially true of what cover there is over machinery and rigging especially when latent defects etc come into the equasion. However here are some comments on the problems you highlight which in many cases would not result in a claim but might result in some DIY.


Westerly Centaurs are 30 years old now and the points you mention are all items one might expect to see on a boat hauled at the end of the season.

I spoke to a number of insurance companies at the SIBS and it seems this 10 year thing is sometimng drumed up by some insurance companies and many surveyors and not in fact universal. Some insurance companies take the sensible view that the life expectancy of rigging can vary between a boat racing every weekend around the cans and the motor sailor that gets the sails up every second sunday for 5 months of the year and so write their conditions accordingly, shop around. A good inspection of the rigging and mast mounts will show if there are impending problems especially in the proximity og the attachments to the rigging wire and unless you are heading of to JAmaica next weekend should be fine if no broken wires are detected. The cost of re rigging a Centaur is not excessive if needs must.

Keel bolts are another well discussed issue and as your boat was ashore for the survey one must ask was the water you saw from leaking keel boats. I have seen a worrying amount of water in the keel pods on a boat ashore and this has come form either leaking windows or condensation which forms on the boat side internally under the lockers.

The keels are not likely to drop off neither will the leakage suddenly become Niagra falls. I have seen more than one Centaur owner keep this weeping at bay with a bead of silicone sealant applied around the keel joint externally. Yes ideally the keel should be dropped the sealant replaced and the keel secured back up to the hull.

DO not try and stop the leakage if it exists by using excessive torque on the keel bolts as they are only reacting on a fibre glass hull and it is possible to destroy the integrity of the hull around the keel boats by excessive crushing forces.I vae seen in one case keel nuts driven half way through the hull of a Westerly Vulcan in an effort to stop weeping and the cost to repair this damage was excessive

One thing to look at in the internal keel area is for cracks around stiffeners locker bulkheads and the Loo bulkead and adjust offer accordingly. Centuars moored on dring moorings are more likely to get leaky keels and show up hull weaknesses in this area and may have had additional stiffeners added across the keel pods.

The original engine could be an MD2b . It is more likely to blow up due to operator error than to neglect. In the case of neglect it might just not start /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

The original exhaust on some of these engines included a cylndrical silencer/water trap shaped a bit like a black fender. The water trap bits in these will have failed if still fitted and there is a risk of the engine filling with water that runs back when the engine is stopped and then hydraulic locking on start up. Generally these water traps will have been replaced by now by the more modern swan neck ones Vetus etc so you should not have this problem but beware. If the owner says anything about shutting the water off before stopping the engine. do it /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif untill a new trap and vented loop is fitted.

You will hear all sorts of horror stories about old Volvo engines and most are spread by folk without experience. The MD2 B was a solidly built engine and the lower end goes on for ever. The areas that need more regular maintenance are the heads and clearing of water passages in the block if still sea water cooled. Some passages can only be cleaned when the heads are off.

The osmosis in A centaur is usually limited to the gelcoat and if it is only a few pimples then think of it as a reason to adjust the price and deal with some time in the future. Do not take too much notice of folk telling you that it costs 6000 beer tokens to shave off all the gelcoat and damaged substrate as doing this you may finish up with a less sound hull than already there. The american way is to counterbore each dimple one by one and let the hull breath whilst at the same time spraying dailey with hot water till the smell goes away and then fill the countersinks with West filler.

Some in the UK lightly sandblast the affected areas which leaves more filling. and after both apply gelshield or similar.

The Westerly Centaur is a good family boat available from £8000 up to £14,500 however if looking at the higher price then don t consider unless all the boxes are ticked and even then negotiate... I would expect

A post 76 version cosmetically excellent, keel pods no sign of weeps and to include later modifications, Headlinings all replaced and firmly in place all portholes OK , Gas locker venting to overboard fitted . no sign of deck lifting at chain plates and no sign of cabin roof deflecting under mast.

Clean bilges new engine ..

Hull showing no signs of osmosis or records of treatment if done.

Newish rigging newish sails full electronic instrument package and VHF (DSC) Dinghy and outboard.


If you buy the 8000 pound version then expect some maintenance bills in the years ahead:)
 
Provided the vessel is in a seaworthy condition your policy should cover loss or damage from the risks or 'perils' detailed in the contract.These can vary but taking the example mentioned, most would cover breakage of the mast provided this was not due to wear and tear or poor maintenance.
Machinery cover is generally limited to major risks such as fire, explosion collision or sudden incursion of water. Engine breakdown or blowing up would not usually be covered.
It sounds as if you are concerned that insurers may decline a future claim by picking up on something referred to in the survey. It might be helpful to know that Craftinsure's on-line facility has an agreement stating that the surveyors' recommendations have been complied with. Provided this is the case, you simply confirm agreement with the statement prior to purchase. Obviously if there are some recommendations that haven't been complied with you'd need to inform them and get specific agreement. You can see a summary of cover on the website at www.craftinsure.com and most insurers now provide a summary of cover or Key Facts to comply with FSA requirements.
I would add that based on my personal experience from working in the insurance industry for many years, a small amount of osmosis does not generally cause insurers serious concern.
 
I fully agree that protecting any major investment with insurance should be a priority but with some individual injury compensation claims having exceeded £3m, I would say that Third Party cover is of at least equal importance, particularly as with out it, innocent parties entitled to compensation could face great hardship. Whilst personally not in favour of the US style compensation culture that developed in the UK, our company, Craftinsure.com, have seen the number and size of third party claims double in recent years making insurance with good UK approved security all the more important.
 
high Bilgediver
The question of SS 1x19 rigging failure is interesting. It may well be that insurance companies will go by apparent condition of the rigging wire and the apparent amount of use it gets. However my experience is that rigging wire will defy logic and tends to fail on calender time ie 15to 20 years regardless of amount of use and apparent condition.
I do suspect however that the 3 and 4mm sizes are perhaps more prone to sudden failure than 5 and 6 mm. but that might be just my limited experience. olewill
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

P
Deck core on older boats
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
2K
steve yates
S
onesea
Non structural filler...
Replies
12
Views
463
onesea
onesea
J
High Moisture readings on deck in balsa core - advice please as to where the moisture has come from?
Replies
14
Views
396
jimbo
J
P
Best age for our 'new to us' yacht
2
Replies
24
Views
827
Obi
O
T
Volvo dripless just replaced but still leaks
Replies
12
Views
464
MikeBz
MikeBz

Share this page

Top