Insurance dilemma

[Roy]

Insurance dilemma for boat owners

I came across this artical and thought it was worth a note:

"As a liveaboard narrowboat owner I was very concerned to read about the dilemma of Noman and Pauline Brown's insurance claim reported in Towpath Talk (News, Issue 79, May).
The insurer N&G declined the claim for loss of and damage to hull and personal belongings on the grounds that the boat 'had not been kept in a seaworthy condition! This raises the vital question on the definition of 'sea worthiness' of a narrowboat. What was it that the Browns failed to do according to the insurers?
Little Nell, the boat lost by the Browns, would appear to be like the vast majority of narrowboats in the country and of very similar design. Certainly an 80mph wind would penetrate and fill most cratches on any narrowboat known to me, leading to the water flooding the hull. The question of reasonable/unreasonable
comes to mind when preparing a boat for 'sea worthiness!
I appreciate there may be features of this matter which have not been reported but on the bare facts known it might be interesting for the Browns to consider referring the matter to the UK Financial Ombudsman Service, which would adjudicate when an insurance company is considered to be unreasonable or unfair.
It might be interesting to pursue this matter further since every boat user on the inland waterway could find themselves exposed in some way to a totally unexpected situation."
Pamela Hedge By email


I have heard of other cases where the insurer has used the excuse of "not been kept in a seaworthy condition" or "not in a seaworthy condition at the time of the accident" as an excuse not to pay out. Makes you think!

[billy]

There is a lot of trust in marine insurance. True the bss helps but if the weather is doing it's damnedest to sink your boat and there has been sufficient warning for flooding and storms then it is expected that the owner will try to mitigate against such.

I think it stems from the old days when seamen didn't really want to drown so kept the ship "seaworthy". Insurers don't often say much but it is assumed that you will look after your boat. If something happens and the boat goes down the company will "look" even if it had nothing to do with the reason for the sinking.

Some folk tie up their boats costing thousands of pounds with a bit of sash cord and don't come down all winter. Others leave outboards hanging off the back and wonder why they get nicked. Some people just ring up after a big storm and ask about their boat whilst others are down with extra ropes and fenders and spend the night in the car. Some do their best and still fall foul of the small print.

It pays to talk to your insurance company and find out in writing exactly what they mean. I have a clause which forbids more than 24 hours single handed sailing. I spent three months away single handed so did that mean I wasn't insured? Well yes I was but I had to have had a rest after 24 hours. What did that mean, could I just drop the sails and turn the engine on? They said that no-one had asked them before and it took a lot of to-ing and fro-ing but we sorted something out in the end. It was a common sense agreement that was not too prescriptive and had a bit of leeway, and there is always "force majeure" if thing get really bad and you think you have a case.

Insurance is a way of others to make money and hopefully they will pay out if the need arises. Truth be told they don't want to pay out and on the other side some make dodgy claims.

I used to have "war risks" covered for on my insurance, whatever that meant. As soon as the first "Gulf War" kicked off it was rescinded. When I asked for a refund as they had reduced my cover they said it was a no cost addition and wouldn't refund me.

A friend's boat lost a line and the yard rang him. He was out of the county and he rang to ask me to put another line on. I did, jokingly saying don't sue me if anything goes wrong. The lines were powder from too much sun and the larger line I put on didn't really fit his small (un-seamanlike) cleats. I used some twine to keep it in place but a nasty low pressure came and broke one of the other lines and it ended up on the jetty with a hole in the bottom. I was out there up to my waist trying to save the boat whilst he sat in his car not wanting to get wet. He tried to sue me even though the insurance paid out. It was chucked out of court but I was fortunate to have cover on my third party liability. Why did the insurance pay out if his lines were carp? But they did, and without question, I did keep the remains of the failed rope as evidence but I should have taken photos of it in place as they said it could have been any old bit. Needless to say the gentleman in question is and "ex pal" and I live to not touch another's vessel unless they are there. Shame.

billy

[Roy]

It's like a mine field out there.

[Roy]

Further to Norman and Pauline Browns incident:


A SHORT canal journey from Bluewater Marina at Thome to Rawcliffe Bridge near Goole
turned into a nightmare for liveaboard boaters Norman and Pauline Brown.



Just 100 yards short of their destination, a freak storm with winds gusting up to 80mph
whipped up waves which engulfed their narrowboat little Nell, causing it to sink.
Norman and Pauline, who will be 70 and 65 this year, managed to reach the bank and
rescue their elderly Border Collie, Bill - at 24 believed to be one of the oldest dogs in
the UK - and two-year-old cat Sam.
"We came under the motorway bridge when the gale whipped off the front canopy and turned us around."
Water swamped the boat and the engine vents, but the engine kept running and Norman -
an experienced boater -managed to bring Little Nell to the bank before she went down.
"If that had stopped we wouldn't have had a chance," he added.