yacht insurance renewal

[charles_reed]

On what grounds do they do that? Pants seems to have a good reputation round here - I'm about to change to them myself...

Pantanaeius are OK, though I don't use them myself - I think the 12% was a reference to the excess - a basic tenet of all insurance is that you can't be better off after the claim than before; hence excesses.
I'm afraid one will never know how good your insurers are until you've had to make a claim on them...

 

[Tranona]

Pantanaeius are OK, though I don't use them myself - I think the 12% was a reference to the excess - a basic tenet of all insurance is that you can't be better off after the claim than before; hence excesses.
I'm afraid one will never know how good your insurers are until you've had to make a claim on them...

The 12% is not an excess, but an automatic "betterment" clause and applied independent of the policy excess. The purpose of the excess is to leave a portion of the risk with the insured. The greater the excess, usually the lower the premium. It also has the desirable effect (from the insurers point of view) of reducing the number of minor claims where the cost of dealing with them is high in relation to the value.

 

[charles_reed]

I declined Y Yacht because one clause - "The Vessel is covered for single-handed sailing by the Insured named in the Certificate of Insurance, for a passage which might last 18 hours or more, the Vessel is only covered for loss, damage, liability or expense while underway, provided at least two people are on-board throughout and each person is qualified or has experience appropriate for them to take charge of the Vessel unless otherwise stated in the Certificate of Insurance." - I found unacceptable. The use of the word "might" in a policy is sloppy and while I haven't and have no plans to sail single-handed for >18 hours, it "might" happen. That and they cost more than Pantaenius.

I've single-handed (mostly) for the last 24 years and, whilst it was extremely difficult to get full coverage in the early days it has become easier and easier, even with those who normally exclude single-handing - they'll usually want to put a time-limit on the passage length (the most I've been given was 42 hours) and the majority want to keep it to one overnight and two days on either side. Panataneius strictly limit single-handing to within 250nm of a coastline (fair enough for a sailboat). Some will up the excess, others will only allow it on boats with a radar.
As the probability of loss whilst at sea is minute compared to when you're in sight of land or parked, I don't think they've much to fear.

 

[charles_reed]

The 12% is not an excess, but an automatic "betterment" clause and applied independent of the policy excess. The purpose of the excess is to leave a portion of the risk with the insured. The greater the excess, usually the lower the premium. It also has the desirable effect (from the insurers point of view) of reducing the number of minor claims where the cost of dealing with them is high in relation to the value.

Interestingly, the underwriters with whom I have my policy have no such "betterment" clause and the one major claim I've made did not have such a deduction - it was, in fact, paid without deduction of the excess. Different insurers, different claw-backs...

 

[charles_reed]

Is there any connection between the two companies? I mean is Y a Front for Pants?

;-)

 

[Tranona]

Interestingly, the underwriters with whom I have my policy have no such "betterment" clause and the one major claim I've made did not have such a deduction - it was, in fact, paid without deduction of the excess. Different insurers, different claw-backs...

Betterment clauses are quite common and it seems the Pants one is very specific applying a blanket 10% to any equipment over 10 years old. Practice varies with excesses and it is common for example for an excess not to apply to a claim where the boat was in its home marina. In car insurance the excess is often waived for windscreen replacement (but the cynic might suspect a deal between the major supplier and the insurers!).

 

[charles_reed]

The job of a loss adjuster is to stuff the policy holder
read what is excluded within the policy is jfm`s advise

I'm sorry to hear you've had such an unfortunate experience (or is the opinion based upon prejudice). I've had a number of experiences of loss-adjusters and more have been generous than niggardly. I have to agree with Tranona's point that life is far too messy to conform to any T&Cs.

 

[sailorman]

I'm sorry to hear you've had such an unfortunate experience (or is the opinion based upon prejudice). I've had a number of experiences of loss-adjusters and more have been generous than niggardly. I have to agree with Tranona's point that life is far too messy to conform to any T&Cs.

i have never had a problem with a loss adjuster apart form work related. they are employed by the Ins Co for their benefit only

 

[oldvarnish]

Panataneius strictly limit single-handing to within 250nm of a coastline (fair enough for a sailboat)

That's odd, isn't it? Singlehanding is far more risky near the coast than away from it.

In fact, they gave me s/h coverage all the way up the Atlantic, but the excess went up to £5K

 

[murraymints171]

Out of interest I shopped around for a new quote. I stopped looking as they all wanted a NEW survey. That would make it very expensive.
I am not unhappy with my old insurer but try to avoid automatic renewals

 

[[3889]]

Quote Originally Posted by Lazy Kipper View Post
Is there any connection between the two companies? I mean is Y a Front for Pants?

;-)

Doh, I missed that one. Very good

 

[Koeketiene]

I'm afraid one will never know how good your insurers are until you've had to make a claim on them...

+1

From first hand experience, I know that GJW are very good.

A colleague has nothing but praise for Pants when he needed them in the Caribbean.
At the moment, I am considering switching to Pants as GJW is not overly keen to cover longer, single-handed offshore passages.

Y seems to be rustling up lots of new business by offering very competitive quotes; but as far as I am concerned, till the time when we start getting first-hand feedback on how they settle claims they remain somewhat of an unknown.

 

[xyachtdave]

Y seems to be rustling up lots of new business by offering very competitive quotes; but as far as I am concerned, till the time when we start getting first-hand feedback on how they settle claims they remain somewhat of an unknown.

That's exactly why I borrowed this speed boat earlier this afternoon!

After I explained to the owner of the other vessel my intentions were honourable and I needed to check the quality of his Y Yacht Insurance policy he was quite pleased about the incident.

 

[Koeketiene]

Would be very surprised to learn that accidents in black & white are covered.

That's exactly why I borrowed this speed boat earlier this afternoon!

After I explained to the owner of the other vessel my intentions were honourable and I needed to check the quality of his Y Yacht Insurance policy he was quite pleased about the incident.

 

[xyachtdave]

Would be very surprised to learn that accidents in black & white are covered.

I know, that's the problem you've high lighted with insurance - it's only a bit of paper (in Y Yachts case I've even supplied my own paper....) until you miss judge your capabilities.....and need to claim.

A mans got to know his limitations!

 

[Sneaky Pete]

Just got a bit of a shock with 2014 renewal premium and tried market for a few quotes , any experience of Y Yacht insurance? thks

I am currently insured though them for the second year. Very helpful excellent communication when needed no messing you around. Highly recommended. They have been A1 since my boat was damaged last December and helped my through the repair maze.