yacht insurance renewal

maby said:
They seem to have a decent reputation.
Click to expand...

If you go back over the recent long threads on this subject you will find that comment applies to all the other popular insurers. Not to say that they are all perfect, but the difference seems to revolve around specific exclusions which can result in a claim being rejected. So you can get an insurer with a "decent reputation" who also has disputes with individual claimants or quite legitimately rejects a claim.
 
OR4751 said:
Ever filed a claim?
How did it go?

Cheap rates, friendliness, etc... only go so far.
With insurance in the end it only comes down to one thing: how they settle a claim.
Click to expand...


Who's going to volunteer to wreck their boat this week so we can find out if Y Yachts claims dept works satisfactorily?

I'm busy....
 
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 believe that Y, being a Lloyd's backed broker, use the same loss adjusters as HKJ. This lot, allegedly, do not have such a wonderful reputation when it comes to paying claims, IMHO, of course.
Worth looking into.
 
sailorman said:
The wording "IS" the wording a contractual obligation
Click to expand...

That is a very simplistic view of the world. Of course the policy wording defines what the contract is, but unfortunately claims do not always fall into neat categories so there are times when there are alternate interpretations on specific issues. You only find out about these when the claim occurs. If it was simply looking at the wording there would be no place for loss adjusters.
 
Tranona said:
That is a very simplistic view of the world. Of course the policy wording defines what the contract is, but unfortunately claims do not always fall into neat categories so there are times when there are alternate interpretations on specific issues. You only find out about these when the claim occurs. If it was simply looking at the wording there would be no place for loss adjusters.
Click to expand...
The job of a loss adjuster is to stuff the policy holder
read what is excluded within the policy is jfm`s advise
 
awol said:
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.
Click to expand...

Just re read summary of my insurance as I have to renew on 26.03, same comments about 2 on board unless in certificate, and my certificate confirms single handed for passages with planned duration not exceeding 18 hours, only reference to crew is "competent".

This is Yachtmaster Insurance Services.
 
sailorman said:
The job of a loss adjuster is to stuff the policy holder
read what is excluded within the policy is jfm`s advise
Click to expand...

As usual you are missing the point. I know all about the exclusions, but whatever the clauses are they are open to interpretation. So no matter how clear you think the written contract is, it does not guarantee that your claim will be met to your satisfaction. If insurance companies accepted every claim just because the claimant thinks his claim is justified they would soon be out of business. So there will always be disputes no matter what the wording is.
 
awol said:
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.
Click to expand...


+ 1. Just about any trip "might" take more than 18 hours. I did query this with Y Yacht who responsed to the effect that the clause was only intended to operate with voygages that would ordinarily take more than 18 hours.

If that was the intention why not write the clause to say that?
 
I specifically wanted single-handed cover with no restrictions and have just moved to Pants. Having read their policy and asked for views on here I was pretty satisfied with them.

It helps that they were also cheaper than the alternatives (although I did have to get a survey done).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

G
Topsail Insurance??
Replies
6
Views
927
AndyDavies
A

Share this page

Top