Marina wants to be on my Insurance?

[ColdEH]

Originally Posted by thinwater

This is common place and the broker is lazy.

Put another way, wouldn't you like to know that the boat next to you is insured? How many boats on-the-hard look nearly abandoned?

Splitting coverage does not seem too big a deal, to me. It seems that 7-figure liabilities that are your fault are going to happen on the water, not in storage.

My Broker is not lazy, they have worked very hard for me in this matter. It is that our policies are written diferently and I guess the laws are different , im not an lawyer or an insurance person , but I have called a few of them , and they all gave me the same answer.

Regards

[Rocketman]

Originally Posted by typhoon

The question I have for you is, would you refuse a Canadian boat with proof of current insurance of more then adequate liability, into your yard for 6 months. Becuase basically, a Canadian insured boat can not name you on a Canadian policy. Thats not a choice we have as a Canadian boater , it just that our insurance policies are different , that doesn't mean that the Marina is not protected , it is . My policy states it in writing .

Regards

There would be several problems with this scenario.

1. If you keep your boat in FL for 6 months or more it needs to be registered in FL.

2. I am guessing, if you have a FL registered boat, then your Canadian insurance policy would not be good.

3. To answer your question, No we would not allow you to keep your boat at our marina without having the Marina being named as an interested party.

4. I do not know how Canada insurance works, but, if you can not afford to buy your boat without a loan, then the lender will normally require that they be named as a beneficiary if something happens to the boat. Does Canadian law forbid this also, and if not I would think that something could be written to allow the marina in the USA to be covered similarly.

[ColdEH]

Originally Posted by Rocketman

There would be several problems with this scenario.

1. If you keep your boat in FL for 6 months or more it needs to be registered in FL.

2. I am guessing, if you have a FL registered boat, then your Canadian insurance policy would not be good.

3. To answer your question, No we would not allow you to keep your boat at our marina without having the Marina being named as an interested party.

4. I do not know how Canada insurance works, but, if you can not afford to buy your boat without a loan, then the lender will normally require that they be named as a beneficiary if something happens to the boat. Does Canadian law forbid this also, and if not I would think that something could be written to allow the marina in the USA to be covered similarly.

How it reads up here, if there is a financial interest in the boat , say a bank , then yes they would be listed on the policy. Does the marina have a financial interest in my boat, no. Did they pay for it or loan me money for it , no ,do they pay the policy premiums , no.. that's what they asked me .

So, sorry we can not put them on as an additional insured. Thats also what they told me , and I have no problem with that . It works just fine in Canadian waters , also if a boat falls over on mine and it is not insured, my boat insurance will fix my boat , no problem . So I really don't care what other people have on there boats , I am really only concerned with my boat. That's why I insure it . These boats are very expensive


Regards

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Rocketman

T4. I do not know how Canada insurance works, but, if you can not afford to buy your boat without a loan, then the lender will normally require that they be named as a beneficiary if something happens to the boat. Does Canadian law forbid this also, and if not I would think that something could be written to allow the marina in the USA to be covered similarly.

No, but that's a different situation - the loan company has an interest in the boat itself, whereas the marina or yard only has an interest in any damage caused by a client's boat.

[Scott Berg]

That's why the language limits the additional insured to situations where an 'insurable interest' exists.
Not that different and I'm surprised Canadian carriers aren't used to that. I'll check with family in BC and report back...

[Vasco]

Originally Posted by Rocketman

There would be several problems with this scenario.

1. If you keep your boat in FL for 6 months or more it needs to be registered in FL.

.

Not correct. Registration of foreign vessels is only required if used in Florida waterways for 90 consecutive days or more.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Rocketman

As a Dock Master at a small marina we, require all boat owners in our marina to have on file, liability insurance, with the marina listed as a certificate holder, or an interested party for several reasons.

So once again I ask, is the reciprocal arrangement also done? It's also possible to have a marina's equipment or actions cause damage to a client's boat. Do marinas put their clients on their insurance as an "interested party"?

Seems only fair.

[Rocketman]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

So once again I ask, is the reciprocal arrangement also done? It's also possible to have a marina's equipment or actions cause damage to a client's boat. Do marinas put their clients on their insurance as an "interested party"?

Seems only fair.

I understand your question, and I agree that it sounds fair to have a boat owner on the Marina policy, but I think it is not done often. Our small marina is purely a marina were you can moor your boat, we do not offer any services, such as haul out, fuel, food, alcohol and so on so our likely hood of damaging other boat is very small.

If a scenario arises where a boat was damaged as a result of the marina's negligence or damage caused by the marina our insurance policy specifically states that it will cover these clams. I doubt that a boat policy would spell it out for damage cause to a marina.

I was told that we required to be named on boat owner policy's about 7 years ago when we had several named storms and a couple of hurricane's that came though during that time. The problem came when lots of damage was caused by neglected boats in marinas and the insurance company's wouldn't pay the marina because they were not named on the policy. Hence a new requirement came to be.

As far as Canada goes, I would say that it would be rare to have a hurricane so far north so the threat of very large payout as a result of weather would be significantly less.

In normal times it seems that insurance company's are at least fair when you have a clam, but when they are faced with huge payouts they tend to be less friendly.

As for the person that says he doesn't care if a neighbor has insurance or not and then causes damage to your boat, I would say you should care. If you have had a claim or multiple claims on your policy whether it is your fault or not, will cause you insurance to sky rocket or possibly cause you to not get it at all.

[shadow]

as stated, pretty common. It does get a bit annoying when traveling a lot and having to keep updating your policy for every marina.. But get a great agent and all is OK.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Rocketman

I understand your question, and I agree that it sounds fair to have a boat owner on the Marina policy, but I think it is not done often. ... If a scenario arises where a boat was damaged as a result of the marina's negligence or damage caused by the marina our insurance policy specifically states that it will cover these clams. I doubt that a boat policy would spell it out for damage cause to a marina.

I understand Rocket, but isn't 3rd party liability insurance for exactly this situation? When I, the boater, damage someone else's property, my liability coverage covers these costs. Or am I missing something?

Originally Posted by Rocketman

I was told that we required to be named on boat owner policy's about 7 years ago when we had several named storms and a couple of hurricane's that came though during that time. The problem came when lots of damage was caused by neglected boats in marinas and the insurance company's wouldn't pay the marina because they were not named on the policy. Hence a new requirement came to be. ...

In normal times it seems that insurance company's are at least fair when you have a clam, but when they are faced with huge payouts they tend to be less friendly.

I wouldn't doubt this. However, it seems marinas have simply off-loaded a problem with insurance companies, and placed it on the backs of their clients. I fully understand. It makes sense ... from the marina's standpoint. Makes less sense for your clients.

Originally Posted by Rocketman

As far as Canada goes, I would say that it would be rare to have a hurricane so far north so the threat of very large payout as a result of weather would be significantly less.

This is true.

[DeepFrz]

There is another situation that I tried to point out earlier. That is with a "named person" your insurance may be used to help cover damage caused by someone else, not just yourself or your boat. I suppose you could have the agent specifically exclude that but it is a messy situation. However, when in Rome...

[tomdidit]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

So once again I ask, is the reciprocal arrangement also done? It's also possible to have a marina's equipment or actions cause damage to a client's boat. Do marinas put their clients on their insurance as an "interested party"?

Seems only fair.

Guys, it seems that you may be trying to P$%^ up a rope here. Obviously, the marina that the OP wants to keep his boat in has a requirement that he does not like. If he really wants to stay there for six months I assume that he/she can get US insurnace that will take care of the matter. There might be a cost that is not acceptable in that alternative, but it is an alternative.
The other alternative is to find a different marina/yard that does not have the requirement and settle there. Again, problem solved.

The Canadians seem to think this is a US thing and just wrong. I can assure you that not all marinas, including mine, have this launguage. In fact, the language for my marina is the same as for Toronto marinas...you have to have liability insurance, and a copy of it has to be on file with your slip application and agreement, but it does not name the marina as a party. I think because it does not that we have some uninsured boats in the marina, but I have not heard of anyone being caught as yet.

As to the "Well, in Canada we don't/can't/don't have to do that" statements, I learned in my ex-pat time living in Toronto that it really did not matter what I thought of what I was required to do. What mattered was what was expected of me....and it made it a whole lot easier to just do it. I was not going to change a law or a rule because I complained about it. I saw too many ex-pats piss people off complaining about local customs when in fact we were guests in the country and should just be happy to enjoy all that it offered.

And Mike, assuming that you have to have liability insurance on file with your marina, do they give you a copy of their insurance policy in exchange?

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by tomdidit

The Canadians seem to think this is a US thing and just wrong. I can assure you that not all marinas, including mine, have this launguage. In fact, the language for my marina is the same as for Toronto marinas...you have to have liability insurance, and a copy of it has to be on file with your slip application and agreement, but it does not name the marina as a party. I think because it does not that we have some uninsured boats in the marina, but I have not heard of anyone being caught as yet.

Sorry Tom. My issue is not a US vs Canada thing. My point is that it just seems fundamentally unjust. It is a contract weighted heavily to benefit one party over another, and as DeepFrz and others have said, it could result in unintended legal exposure for the boater.

You're right, the OP could just move on. But if we all pushed back on these unfair marina practices, then these business would change.

[tomdidit]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Sorry Tom. My issue is not a US vs Canada thing. My point is that it just seems fundamentally unjust. It is a contract weighted heavily to benefit one party over another, and as DeepFrz and others have said, it could result in unintended legal exposure for the boater.

You're right, the OP could just move on. But if we all pushed back on these unfair marina practices, then these business would change.

I would disagree. In areas that have named storms I think you will see an increase in this type of agreement. The damage that untended boats cause others, and some people just hope for the best and do no prep, will make it mandatory to GUARANTEE their slip holders stay insured.

Sorry, but if you saw the damage from Sandy, you have to know that a lot of marinas are no more and will not be rebuilt because the business model is tough to sustain.

[Dos Gatos]

When I sail in Mexico, I am required to buy an insurance policy from a Mexico insurer. Just the price of playing in another country. I already have US insurance. They don't care. That's how is goes.

Buy a USA policy for the time you are in the USA.

Harden up and get on with life.