Cruising without insurance, how tough?

[Mike Banks]

You need to have third party as well as third party property damage before any Australian marina will let you fuel up. They do not care a jot whether your boat sinks as long as the insurance to remove it is current--because many people who cruise have no money to repair any damage they may cause, either to other persons or vessels or to remove the wreckage of their own should someone collide with them. It has to be removed while waiting to claim on the insurance of whoever sank them.

It is not just berthing in a marina or getting fuel which is a problem. There is always a chance while cruising the coast that you will run intio some illegal fishermen showing no lights while plundering a restricted area. They will swear blind that they had all lights on and were travelling when you came out of the darkness--unlit--and crashed into them while clearly asleep.

Once you could sail most places without comprehensive insurance--these days you MUST have third party (protects any peope you might injure) and third party property damage (protects you from a claim for anything your boat might do for whatever insurable reason to the perhaps multi-million dollar properties of other people).

My comprehensive insurance costs about thirteen hundred dollrs a year. I pay it gladly.

The alternative is to anchor out and have an insured yawlboat to ferry fuel. Simply not practical just to save a grand a year--I would still have to pay three hundred to cover the yawlboat, and I need to take on water and do some laundry and buy stores once in a while.

If you have a smaller vessel with one hull your third party insurances will be much cheaper. These days the water is too crowded to sail without som sort of protection--especially if you sail alone.

[Strygaldwir]

1 out of the 6 or so marina's I stayed at asked to see my insurance. The marina's stays were for more than a week. None of the marinas we stayed in overnight asked to see our insurance docs. (Florida, North carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and the Bahamas)

All the yards that we hauled at (3) required insurance. They even called to make sure the policy was in effect.

[hallie]

keeping the *original* poster in mind, here (i.e. no 'to insure or not to insure ala hamlet' debate) - i can only speak for our marina and the place we hauled her out to paint it, but we're not insured and no one asked.

we're in newport, oregon, so if you don't want insurance, it seems here's a fine place to look for a slip!

...

okay, i do have to weigh in a bit on the off-topic debate: listen, insurance is a lovely *idea*. it is. it's also run by white men in suits, which i trust less than the Bush administration. if you want to insure your boat, fine. if you can risk losing your boat, fine. if you are a complete moron with the handling of your boat, get insurance for the sake of those around you. life is dangerous and always ends in death. the insurance world is an enormous scam - if they weren't collecting more in premiums than they paid out, there would be no insurance industry, right? so we can't treat insurance like it's a god coming down from the sky to rescue us all. it's white men in suits, making money. common sense works nearly as well. i wish more would try it.

[ssullivan]

Originally Posted by hallie

keeping the *original* poster in mind, here (i.e. no 'to insure or not to insure ala hamlet' debate) - i can only speak for our marina and the place we hauled her out to paint it, but we're not insured and no one asked.

we're in newport, oregon, so if you don't want insurance, it seems here's a fine place to look for a slip!

...

okay, i do have to weigh in a bit on the off-topic debate: listen, insurance is a lovely *idea*. it is. it's also run by white men in suits, which i trust less than the Bush administration. if you want to insure your boat, fine. if you can risk losing your boat, fine. if you are a complete moron with the handling of your boat, get insurance for the sake of those around you. life is dangerous and always ends in death. the insurance world is an enormous scam - if they weren't collecting more in premiums than they paid out, there would be no insurance industry, right? so we can't treat insurance like it's a god coming down from the sky to rescue us all. it's white men in suits, making money. common sense works nearly as well. i wish more would try it.

I think, based on your avatar that you're also white... ? I don't see a suit, but I do see a nice sweater with a white person in the photo.

I'm going to venture to guess your dad might be white too. Even maybe your mom. Why the skin color part of the argument? Green men (or women) in suits (or black or purple or yellow or orange) would be more trustworthy than white?

And just exactly what is "white" anyway? English people? Dutch? Spanish? Italians? Sicilians? Israelis? Turks? Greeks? Recent Russian Immigrants? People who fled wars in Kosovo to live here?

My Irish ancestors are pretty pale and white... but they were over here competing with black people for jobs building Central Park in NYC. They were discriminated against and aren't generally well off - on par with the Italians who came at the same time into this country. So which of these groups are the "whites" you are talking about?

I know when you say "in suits" you mean people who are running businesses and supporting shareholders. Many of those shareholders are on this board right now, and cruising on that money that the insurance companies are making for them. Vicious cycle, it is...

Looking back, I'm surprised at what I wrote... because I'm not even a republican. But your hate for the "white man" when you are obviously white is sort of misguided. It's similar to when black people hate themselves. We should all accept who we are and where we come from.

Any ideas for making things better re: shareholders? They do ruin the quality of life for your average citizen, agreed. But many people are out sailing on that shareholder money. I'm stumped... any ideas?

[dana-tenacity]

Insurance companies should be run as a co-operative, spreading the risk, not to make money for the shareholders, then I might trust them a little more. I've heard too many stories of insurance companies wriggling out of claims to do so now.
Never had insurance on the boat, don't now. Would be annoyed at being forced into it.

[hallie]

good grief, man.

[Charlie]

Wow I agree with Hallie and Sulli:
Insurance companies are run by corporate morons who try toget by w/o paying any claims. If you don't know enough to fight them then you are in trouble.

On the other hand if you don't have liability insurance and you hit a $500k power boat and need to have the boat LPUed after damage that will set you back a small fortune. If you can't afford the $200 to $1,000 a year for insurance how are you going to afford to have a 50' boat hauled and buy the materials to fix it yourself? That is if you have the skills.

In terms of the white people comment. My ethnic heritage is Heinz 57 Irish Scottish and Salvadorian (from El Salvador) Does that make me white or Mexican? (That is based on the theory that anyone who lives south of San Diego is a Mexican)I'm neither a tree huggin liberal or a psuedo christian right wing extremist. I consider myself militantly moderate. I like common sense, carrying your own weight, and treating people with respect all of which seem to be lacking in most people be they white red yellow green or pola dot.

Ok rant is over LOL.

[Pelagic]

My experience with Marine Insurance on a commercial level is that often whenever there is a substantial claim the Insurance companies will try every trick in the book to wriggle out of it. Stalling, incurring huge legal fees on both sides, they wear the claimant down and failing that, they close down and walk away from all those under their cover.

No one insures the Insurance Companies and often, the syndicated “names” just disappear via bankruptcy filing when they are called upon to deliver a painful catastrophic payment. Three years later, those same names raise the ugly parasitic heads again, to feast on the fears of the uninformed.

This is a huge con that the legal industry has raised to an art form to raise the claimants costs dramatically.

On principle, I believe it is better to be self insuring via a “Liability Fund” held in an interest bearing escrow and act responsibly if at fault.

[Mike Banks]

OK--but when a sudden gust of wind has the good ship "Unconcerned" driven on to some outrageously expensive craft belonging to an insurance broker--betcha sweet life you will get your ass sued off--and if you sell all you have and can no longer cruise--you might, in the wisdom of hindsight (pardon the pun) regret not having that evil third party property damage el-cheapo insurance policy.

Now--let us think about storm damage--you careful sailor you--such as happened recently in the Whitsundays here where many boats were lost fastened to registered marine department approved moorings. They were careful too--and many of them are broke, boatless and being sued as we speak for something that might not really be their fault--but the damage was done by their boat.

Of course those bad things only happen to other, careless incompetent sailors.

Insure with a good insurance company.

Lotsa luck--

[Ex-Calif]

Let's give Hallie the benefit of the doubt (until proven otherwise) that the comment about "white men in suits" was simply the stereoptypical, if outdated, view of "the man", "the establishment", "the republicans" - LOL. If she is that liberal then I dooubt she is prejudiced against any race, creed or color - except perhaps the purple people.

However, Hallie is misguided about insurance.

Individually there is a small statistical probability of being struck by lightning. Collectively a lot of us will be struck by lightning. A lot of people contributing a small amount to the few that do get struck by lightning is how insurance works.

It takes a major but unlikely event and makes the bearing of the financial burden possible by the few that it occurs to.

Interestingly within that risk envelope - depending on the terms of insurance - is an amount to cover the unlikely event of being struck by someone with no insurance, i.e. the uninsured motorist.

The insurance company then disburses the amount and likely attempts to seize the assets of the uninsured.

That they make a profit is called capitalism. There is plenty of fair competition so I'd rather live in this system rather than, what would be fair? Communism?

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by Mike Banks

They were careful too--and many of them are broke, boatless and being sued as we speak for something that might not really be their fault--but the damage was done by their boat.

Unless negligence in mooring the boat is proven I don't see how any boat owner can be liable for this "act of God." And if negligence is proven it would have to be proven against what 30-70 skippers?

However - it is a fantastic example of why be insured and why "regional" premiums are skewed. I don't mind paying my share to the pool but one does not have to subsidize the folks in hurricane alley or who choose to live on the cliffs of Malibu.

[Ramona]

Originally Posted by Mike Banks

Now--let us think about storm damage--you careful sailor you--such as happened recently in the Whitsundays here where many boats were lost fastened to registered marine department approved moorings. They were careful too--and many of them are broke, boatless and being sued as we speak for something that might not really be their fault--but the damage was done by their boat.

Of course those bad things only happen to other, careless incompetent sailors.

Insure with a good insurance company.

Lotsa luck--

Ok lets here about these good Australian insurance companies. I did have third party property and public liability cover. I moor up to a council owned wharf which has insurance cover. When I read the small print on my cover I found that the vessel was not covered as soon as I let the ropes go. There was no cover if someone was to injure themselves on the boat, amateur fishermen often fish off the boat. The cover only covered injuries sustained if some one fell over a fish box etc I left on the wharf. I paid $900 a year for that pleasure. Previous commercial boat I had, I had to pay for an annual survey of $2500 first on top of the fee. The survey consisted of a visit in the cabin and a cup of coffee.
The sailing clubs and yacht clubs have rapidly diminishing members. Some clubs have had to close their doors. Some times its the high costs of insurance, other time its because they just can't get cover.
As for the boats on moorings its going to depend on who owns the moorings and who is actually going to be liable. Check the small print carefully.

[GordMay]

Of course "white men in suits" is a stereotypical characterization of the ruling elite, who have been (and continue to be, for the most part) rich, white, men.
Any interpretation of the phrase as a “hate” message is, itself, a display of ignorance.
Lest anyone be offended, let me state that ignorance is not a hateful state, merely one we can all work towards reducing (we’re all ignorant of MOST knowledge).

[Fishspearit]

I went around yesterday and asked at a few marinas, and none of them required insurance, and one of them hauled boats as well. So at least there are a few left. I guess there really are two schools of thought. If I were buying a $100,000 or more boat, then yes, I agree I would want everybody else to be insured as well so that they could subsidize my necessary full coverage insurance. Keep my rates down and all that. But I intend to buy a boat which I can fix, which is not so valuable that a scrape of the paint job would cost $10,000 to fix. We're not sailing around in egg shells out there, boats get banged and dinged and run into. So do pilings. I've hit telephone pole sized logs at night floating off the Dominican Republic, I've had boats run into me while I was sitting at anchor, boats swing into me in crowded anchorages. Like someone said earlier, sh!t happens, and if you can't afford to fix or repair your boat, then YOU need to buy full coverage. Don't rely on all the boats around you to subsidize your insurance costs.
At a marina, I can concede the possibility of a fire spreading across tightly packed in boats. But what's the risk at haulout that requires me to be insured? Is my boat going to break the travel lift? There has to be space for the lift to get between the boats, so they aren't so close as to allow fire to spread. The yard blocks the boat up, so if it falls it's their fault. I've seen plenty of boats damaged by yard equipment, so it certainly makes sense for me to verify a boat yards insurance policy since they are the ones doing the risky and hazardous work, but how is my boat going to damage the yard or another boat?
It seems the insurance industry has done a great job of convincing everyone that liability insurance is some 'great moral obligation', when in fact the purpose is to protect your assets, nothing else. If I owned $500,000 worth of assets, my insurance man would be ripping me off if he sold me a million dollar liability policy. If I had 10 million in assets, I would want a 10 million dollar liability policy. So why should somebody with $50,000 in assets be expected to buy a million dollar liability policy to protect assets that he doesn't have?
Sorry, I violated my own request to not indulge in the discussion of whether or not to buy. I guess it's a more compelling topic. But for those of you who mentioned the costs of a liability policy, the $1000 number came from IMS. Granted, that was a ballpark number given, not an exact quote because I haven't bought the boat yet. Since it looks like I may be forced into buying it though, I would appreciate anyones leads on where to find the cheapest, dirtiest policy that will suffice for marinas and cover me in Florida and the Bahamas during hurricane season. And they will cover me for the true, real risk of hurricanes if my boat causes damage, not just the boogeyman hiding in the closet type risks, right?

[ssullivan]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Of course "white men in suits" is a stereotypical characterization of the ruling elite, who have been (and continue to be, for the most part) rich, white, men.
Any interpretation of the phrase as a “hate” message is, itself, a display of ignorance.
Lest anyone be offended, let me state that ignorance is not a hateful state, merely one we can all work towards reducing (we’re all ignorant of MOST knowledge).

I don't think anyone is offended. I think it was an interesting and healthy conversation. I especially liked Hallie's rebuttlal.

It's not that serious, just an intellectual curiosity... and analysis of the "white men in suits" idea. I spoke to the white men thing, but the "in suits" part is the most interesting. Many sail on yields from investments.... but those same shareholders really are "the man" and are directly responsible for the ways of the insurance companies.

Quite a little paradox.