Who to insure with?

B

burgundyben

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 Nov 2002
Messages
7,484
Location
Niton Radio
Visit site
My insurance is due for renewal, for many years I was with Navigators and General via a local broker, at a cost of about £450. I did once make a claim for a couple of thousand and they were fine to deal with.

Last year I moved to GJW for about £250.

Its possible of course that the £200 saved might cost me the value of the boat.

Many times in the past I have said that if the worst happened then the boat is well insured...but is it? Just because the certificate says the value of the boat is significantly more than I could realistically sell for doesn't mean she's well insured if some weasel words in the policy mean the insurers won't pay out.

I can honestly say in 11 years of having the boat I've never read the policy document. Ooops.

Its clear there is concern over some of the policies available.

I'd like to know I am 'well' insured with a policy that's not entirely built on exclusions rather than cheaply insured.

So how do I choose one of the best?
 
My only experience with GJW was a positive one - I was with them for several years when I had a canopy damaged in the storms (probably '95 or thereabouts).

They paid out without question and the day after I sent the invoice for the new cover, less 30% as the old canopy was 10 yrs old and we'd agreed that in advance as it was near end-of-life anyway.

Would use again without issue.
 
Nothing against GJW or any of the BIG name insurers, but I have always used Denovo Marine Underwriting in Lymington.
I find their small company approach - the care and attention and the way they treat you very much as an individual- refreshing.

If you call up, Shelly usually answers. Shelly will send out your policy docs and it will be her handling your renewal. They also have a rep on the road who will gladly talk directly to clients.
Fully Lloyds backed and I have personally found as a result of a very unusual claim, their cover is very good indeed.
Their rep is Dean Shaw and he can be reached on 07919400119.

No need to change if you are happy, but if you would like the slightly more personal approach then give Dean a call.

Tom
 
With all due respect to the posters above, its not about anecdotal evidence of a claim that's been made or about personal service, its a contract and its all about the wording therein.
 
Have to say I am in the same boat, we have been insured with Nav & General for the last ten years or so and other than ensuring that I am covered in regards to cruising area, mooring location and type, sums insured etc. I have not perused the contract in detail.

Reading the other threads on here currently is quite worrying, I had always assumed [dangerous I know] that an ingress of water, minor sinking etc would be covered, possibly not. Well worth the combined efforts of the forum experts to help us demand a better quality of contract from the insurers.

Bedtime reading is required I suppose.
 
burgundyben said:
With all due respect to the posters above, its not about anecdotal evidence of a claim that's been made or about personal service, its a contract and its all about the wording therein.
Click to expand...

So ask them!

That's the beauty of someone like Denovo.

You can explain exactly what you want.
If they can do it they will quote for it. If they can't a human being will explain why not.
 
Sounds like yet another one for JFM. Two questions - who is he insured with and did he modify the policy, if so with what.
I would also respect his decision if he declines.
 
sunquest said:
Sounds like yet another one for JFM. Two questions - who is he insured with and did he modify the policy, if so with what.
I would also respect his decision if he declines.
Click to expand...

JFM has stated many times publicly that he is with Pantaeneous, and he is very happy with their policy doc. Sorry JFM if I am answering for you, but I think this is your position?
 
burgundyben said:
Thanks, I'll study Y Yacht and Pantenaeiueaus policy docs.
Click to expand...

I recently went into all this in some detail, prompted by my now previous insurer demanding a survey. Read all the forum threads (really helpful) and then asked for 6 quotes, with policy details. Really interesting in the variances in policies. Eventually chose to go with Y insurance, gaining a slightly lower quote but more importantly better terms and cover than my previous insurer was prepared to offer.

So it is good advice to check into the detail and find what is best for you - no one else can really do this for you!
 
I insure with Pantaenius because I'm happy with the wording of the contract, the customer service and the price. The last time I looked, Y insurance and GJW also had very good policies imho.

In my opinion (i) HKJ and (ii) the Towergate/Axa/BishopSkinner/Bluefin grouping offer poor policy wording that could cause a typical boater to suffer a claim rejection that they weren't expecting. That has actually happened to posters on these forums

There are loads of other insurers not mentioned above and I do not know what their policies say and they could be great policies. I definitely don't want to tar them with the HKJ/Bluefin-et-al brush.

No insurance policy is perfect by the way. I have worked out plausible scenarios which, in the event if they happened to you, would mean you'd be better with Pantaenius than Y, and vice versa depending which scenario you pick. I can't think of any plausible scenario where you'd say you were glad you were insured with HKJ/Bluefin-et-al, rather than Y or Pantaenius

It's a tricky thing insurance. If you tell me what loss you've suffered THEN I can tell you which policy you should have bought last week :-)
 
I have just spent an hour looking into this, I like the Pantaenius policy, its clearly worded, simple written which is useful for this bear of simple brain. From my interpretation there's no wiggle room for the underwriter to claim lack of maintenance as a reason to not pay out, it says that if lack of maintenance causes loss, provided that a 'peril' has also occured then there is cover, ie, damage as a consequence of age/wear and tear/lack of maintenance is covered.

The Y Yacht policy has a much bigger list of exclusions and my interpretation is that damage as a consequence of age/wear and tear/lack of maintenance is NOT covered.

Scrolling up and down the GJW policy doc made me dizzy....
 
burgundyben said:
I have just spent an hour looking into this, I like the Pantaenius policy, its clearly worded, simple written which is useful for this bear of simple brain. From my interpretation there's no wiggle room for the underwriter to claim lack of maintenance as a reason to not pay out, it says that if lack of maintenance causes loss, provided that a 'peril' has also occured then there is cover, ie, damage as a consequence of age/wear and tear/lack of maintenance is covered
Click to expand...
Exactly. It's a good policy from the customer's point of view. It takes all these very subjective arguments about lack of maintenance off the table and has a short list of clear (and acceptable) exclusions. It is sooooo much better than the HKJ policy imho
 
Was with Nav & Gen, but felt their policy at nearly 3 times the IMO comparable competition I am again with Traffords. GJW did offer a policy not requiring survey, but there was clearly a premium to pay for this, and anyway I have a fairly recent survey.

I read the policy for Y Yachts and GJW and found Traffords policy equally written. Y Yachts made it clear the quote was not for negotiation.

I suppose the issue is never having had to make a claim do I find out they are not up to the mark the hard way, because I didn't read the terms closely enough. I did check concerns raised on this forum regarding restrictions being placed by Bishops Skinner, and this was not the case with Traffords.
 
I have asked Pantaenius for a quote.

I do intend to ask, had it been me that got tangled up with the front of a bloody great orange gas tanker out in the Solent and been prosecuted, would the insurance pay the £100k costs the chap has to pay?
 
Here's a suggestion. As there seems to be a few boat owners loyal to HKJ, would it be helpful to have a list of the offending exclusions so that current or prospective policy holders can ask their policies to be endorsed (marine insurers are often willing to do this).

As well as providing additional protection, this would also draw HKJ's attention to the issues. If HKJ refuse to endorse the policies and customers go elsewhere it would also make this more visible to them.

As well as HKJ, we could do the same for 'Y' and 'Pants' although the list of recommended endorsements is likely to be a lot shorter!

Would this be of interest to forumites?
 
burgundyben said:
I do intend to ask, had it been me that got tangled up with the front of a bloody great orange gas tanker out in the Solent and been prosecuted, would the insurance pay the £100k costs the chap has to pay?
Click to expand...
Hang on Ben. Aren't you getting bothered here by too-esoterical stuff? I wouldn't dream of asking my insurer that simply because I know for sure I will never while conscious and at a functioning helm sail under a ship's bow like that. My personal view (apols if comes across as arrogant!) is that the Atalanta thing wasn't something that " could have happened to anyone". If you or I or many others had been helming Atalanta, it would never have happened

So each to their own but I wouldn't choose my insurer based on whether or not they cover that cost. FWIW, I think Pantaenius and insurers generally would not cover that. I think you should make the choice on the basics - cover for fire, theft, storm, water ingress from any of the typical things that can happen on a boat, and that sort of thing. And cover for liability to third parties. All without exclusions for any of the typical risks that a boat owner is exposed to
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

O
South Coast - Cheap boating option
4 5 6
Replies
104
Views
3K
stranded
S
I
Turkey vs Greece for cheap boat storage on handstand + refit – advice needed!
Replies
8
Views
395
DoubleEnder
DoubleEnder

Share this page

Top