Originally Posted by tomfl
A lot of surveys are for insurance
purposes. The thing is insurance companies would not stay in business very long if they insured boats for double, or more, what the boat was worth. So insurance companies have a vested interest in insuring boats at a value that is at least in the ball park of the value of the boat.
The thing is lots of folks who are paying lot five figures for a boat don't insure them except for liability if it is required (something required in some places); so the survey
value of the boat is moot. On the other hand if a boat cost more than say $US100,000 the owner may well insure the boat as the loss would be a big hit. But if you buy a boat for $US100,000 and try and insure it for $US250,000 the insurance company might well decline.
On the other hand the purpose of a lot of surveys is to get a list of potential problems with the boat the buyer and present to the seller so they can say lower the price
based on these problems. Often times the surveyor
will greatly inflate the cost of dealing with those problems. Not to mention that it is common for the buyer to somewhat ignore problems they can live with. I know plenty of folks in BKH who buy ice every day and put it in a non working fridge to keep food
cold. Same goes for new sails
. Many boats never leave the harbor so the running rigging
may be a disaster but sails
are never raised. How many times have we seen an outboard
powering a boat with a non working inboard?
I would bet in most cases a surveyor by talking to the client knows if they want a realistic value for insurance or something else.
Sort of. Overvaluation can produce fraud, or at least the temptation, but the additional "agreed value" is covered by the premium addition if there is coverage. Probably some risk of fraud is automatically built into the premium, but not those doubled numbers, particularly if combined with a intentional destructive event. I also would not be surprised to see a reasonable market value or a actual cost clause that assists the carriers even in policies with agreed value as the basis for the hull
coverage. But then I've not insured a vessel for a long time.
On the other side of the equation is the honest but avaricious (can one be both?) owner who wants to see a maximum value for a boat they own but do not have hull
insurance. Surveyors have ways of kiting this number without quite misstating any facts.
There was an old song that said something about, "Its all in the game