Would you or wouldnt you...Admiral Insurance

starboard

starboard

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 Dec 2003
Messages
3,016
Location
N5533 W00441
Visit site
With all the interest shown ( nearly 2900 views last time I looked) with regard the ""Stockbroker, Girfriend , Yacht on rocks thread"". Would you now consider using Admiral insurance in the future.

Who really has been the winner???? will all this free publicity be good or bad for Admiral???

Paul.
 
Both my friend and I are both with GJW. He has just had a claim settled by them, he was going to post something on here he was so delighted with their service, he is a bit busy though as hes of to Oz on Weds.

Admrial, mmm, I think not!
 
Admiral? No, but then again, I have had problems with claims before, so I treat them all with caution, just that Admiral deserve more caution than others.
 
I would, I do'nt know the ins and outs of it but its perfectly reasonable for the insurance co to not pay out if conditions are breached. I would just wish to know that such breaches were substantive.
 
I'm hunting for boat insurance at the moment - I did get a quote from them - but it wasn't the cheapest and the aforementioned thread certainly put me off!

I'll be steering clear (of admiral, and hopefully rocks! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif )
 
When our boat was wrecked in Hurricane Ivan we heard of dissatisfaction with Admiral amongst other cruisers. We had a tough time with Yachtsure ,brokered by GH, who upset us a great deal.

Now switched to Pantaenius who we heard nothing but praise from after the Hurricane.
 
Speaking as an insurance wallah of sorts (albeit not personal insurance), it would be unwise to select or decline to use a particular company on the strength of one case alone. Like a number of those who responded to the initial thread, I suspect we do not have anything like the full SP for this case. Boat insurance generally is quite competitive, especially for AWB's, so companies tend to err on the side of caution and pay out unless they have good grounds for refusal, to mitigate against losing business.
 
Off topic a little, but from reading the Daily Mail story in the "other" thread, I see the skipper of "Wellworthy" has a new yacht...... and has been out a few times already.

I wonder if he's changed insurers.
 
GJW are great. Last year, two weeks after taking delivery of new boat (and hence two weeks after insuring with GJW), we caught a large rope 3 miles west of the Needles Fairway which wrecked all four props. Total cost of repair was £1500,. GJW gave the OK over the phone to go ahead, and the cheque was received eight days later!! No inspections, no quibble. This year I was offered a cheaper quote by Knox Johnston, but after a telephone call to GJW they agreed to reduce the quote and excess, and though they were still £80 more expensive, I stayed with them due to my earlier positive experience.

Insurance is no good if the buggers try to find every way possible of not paying a claim.
 
Its a shame my pal John is not going to be able to add his own endorsement to GJW, I know he is extremely happy with the way they handled his claim.
 
Perhaps it said in the small print that "only the owner would be allowed to helm. No crew could helm at any time. The skipper must be awake and at the helm 24/7. It is not permitted for any skipper to sleep when on extended trips."
 
My post in the main thread seem to get lost in the arguments going on. Anyway here it is again:

"As someone who is insured with Admiral and therefore concerned about my own coverage, I actually forwarded on this thread to them.

I had a call this morning from them where they explained the situation and I am more than comfortable with the explanation. I don't think I would be compromising any outcome by saying that there were some specific additional conditions applied to the policy to cover the fact that the insured was very inexperienced and in possession of an expensive yacht. Those conditions were breached, hence the position that Admiral are taking.


Basically it sounds like Admiral were managing their risks responsibility by taking on a policy that could have so easily been denied, by making some sensible conditions apply. Firstly this encourages the insured to take heed of what is effectively advice/guidance and secondly it protects the premiums of others.

This will all come out in the end. "
 
The damage is done Richard rightly or wrongly. People are afraid to insure with companies that are likely to try to wriggle out of a claim, there for the grace of God and all that.

What they have told you is that they added endorsements to his policy that he has in their opinion breached. Without knowing the facts the fear is that the insurance company is using the "small print" to avoid a pay-out.

Admiral are in a no win situation, pay out an unjustified claim or loose a ton of renewal business. As a business owner it seems to me that with a case with this much publicity, Admiral could have turned it to their advantage. Lets face it the press has crucified the owner, it looks like negligence, and if Admiral had paid out in full without a quibble, how much new business would that have brought them. The whole advertising strategy of Pantaenius is precisely that they are a no quibble company, but you pay for that. Admiral could have given the yacht owning community the same impression, how many additional policies would they have had to write to have recouped their money?

In the end, I think they have made a commercial mistake and damaged their business. They may have valid reasons for not paying out, but most people will not see it that way. Most people will see this as an accident and insurance is they to pay out when an accident occurs, no matter how stupid it may seem in hindsight.
 
The "facts and fiction" post by Sailfree applies to this one as far as I'm concerned. We obviously do not know all the facts that caused them not to pay out. But add to this case what other people have said about them on this thread and the answer would be definitely not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top