Pantaenius is a Selective & Elective Joke Can someone help?

[hamburking]

My boat had been covered under my home owners policy, which covered "watercraft" up to 50hp. However, when my marina asked for $2million in liability insurance, I had to get a separate policy. The first bunch of insurance companies I called immediately balked...no one wants to insure a boat over 25 years old (mine was 40 years old). Finally, I found a policy and broker (Harbour Marine Insurance, Toronto) which had a special policy for older boats, which did not require a survey. The catch...mostly liability insurance ($2mil), and very little other coverage. If the boat were a total loss, they would give me market value...according to their numbers, not mine, and no amount for personal items, and a high deductible. So basically, almost nothing. However, the policy was cheap ($300/year), kept my marina happy, and I wouldn't lose my house if someone got injured because of my boat. I noticed that several older boats left the marina rather than find increased insurance coverage.

Some other insurance companies would just not cover anything over 25 years. Some wanted a survey every 2 years. The policy I bought, at $300/year, I felt cost less than getting a survey every 2 years. As for safety, I surveyed the boat myself every winter, and I believe I was much more stringent than any surveyor...as it was my life on the line, and my kids.

[CarinaPDX]

I'm not sure why the OP is so upset about a single insurer not wanting his business - they do get to pick their customers.

I was insured by Pantaenius UK for 12 years, no claims. I was very happy with them, had even stopped by and had a chat in Plymouth. I have no hesitation giving them a good recommendation.

When I was leaving the Canaries (2009) I asked about US coverage and was told that they were not insuring US yachts in US waters for less than $250k valuation. So, on to the next one - no big deal.

I do think there is some sloppy thinking going on here: "Pantaenius" (as in German company), "Pantaenius UK", and "Pantanius US" are three different, but related, companies. The UK company has earned quite a good reputation. What little I have heard about the German parent was somewhat less positive. The US company doesn't show up on my radar because they are only interested in creaming off the high end of the market. Each of these companies has its own management and its own strategy, and apparently their own take on customer service. So let's be specific about which company we are talking about.

Greg

[Bulawayo]

I have to challenge that last statement. Pantaenius is NOT the best out there - it likely depends upon which office. We were insured with the Monaco branch (not sure if they are franchised?) and after a yard in Turkey dropped our cat onto concrete driving one keel into the hull and also smashing the aft bulkhead and then they managed to drop a mast from another boat onto our deck, whose spreaders punched through the saloon window, we made a claim. It was a living nightmare and cost us thousands of dollars. The assessor, a German living in Marmaris, belittled the damage after we declined his request for commission and Pantaenius were very, very difficult and slow to react. We were left in limbo for months and calls to their H.O. were a total waste of time.
I have heard good about the UK outlet, but Monaco - steer well clear of them.

Originally Posted by boatman61

For a fully comprehensive insurance with Pantaenius UK one needs a full survey including in my case a hull thickness test.. then the named person has to provide qualifications appropriate for the proposed areas of navigation..
USA I believe has more rich folk so the minimum is higher.. keep the trailer trash like me out..
If you just go for 3rd Party likely you'll get it..

PS; I am insured with Pantaenius.. best out there.

[takeabow40]

had the same trouble with them in oz they wanted to know why I was changing my insurance company and would not insure the the boat anyway was more than 10 years old .

[AAFMIAMI]

Okay! Would be nice if you could hook me up with him to be able to get a quote!
Thank you.

[AAFMIAMI]

I knew it!! It is obviously a franchise situation with too little control of Customer Service!
Imagine! At the NYC branch it does not get any better!

[AAFMIAMI]

CarinaPDX

Thank you so much about your post.
We are talking about VERY SPECIFICALLY about
"Pantaenius" MUCH Regardless where they are located! It does not matter
If the company is branding or franchising or licensing or just lending their name it is still THE name and in the real business world that is what matters! Furthermore if they are in 3 different locations and 2 of them are conducting business practices poorly, maybe it is more than time for someone to wake them up!
I am a marketing branding specialist for a famous celebrity and since this is what I do for a living for the past 26 years I have a little idea about what I am saying here. It should be unacceptable for any company to provide poor customer service! There is nothing really that would justify that! Because after all the truth of the matter is that we can do whatever we do as long as we do it right. Problems are never about what we have done, they are just about HOW we did it.
They do have the right to be elective, selective, expensive but they need to be nice, professional and care for a reputation! This online discussion right here is already a walk backwards for their business.

Thank you for listening.

[leftbrainstuff]

Originally Posted by Symphony

I have never had a marina or harbormaster ask to see my proof of insurance in more than 25 years of messing around in boats. US, Mexico, some Caribbean.

Required in most marinas in the San Francisco bay area. Liability insurance is mandatory.

Most marinas are lax in ensuring that insurance is renewed or even is current.

We are wary of marinas that dont require proof of insurance.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[CarinaPDX]

Originally Posted by AAFMIAMI

We are talking about VERY SPECIFICALLY about "Pantaenius" MUCH Regardless where they are located!

Except they are different, have different policies and different management. If you want to pretend that they are all the same and ignore the reality, be my guest.

It does not matter If the company is branding or franchising or licensing or just lending their name it is still THE name and in the real business world that is what matters! Furthermore if they are in 3 different locations and 2 of them are conducting business practices poorly, maybe it is more than time for someone to wake them up!

While they should be adhering to the same high standards, that is not in fact the case in much of the world for many brands. I am living in the real world, not an ideal one. Differences in performance are the result of differences in culture, expectations, management, laws, and a host of other things. In this case, IIRC Pantaenius left the US marine insurance market two or three decades ago due to some of our nutty liability judgements, and when they returned they did so in a limited manner - probably due to a desire to minimize liability exposure. As for the friendliness of customer service, there's a reason big corporations prefer Omaha to NYC for call centers...

I am a marketing branding specialist for a famous celebrity and since this is what I do for a living for the past 26 years I have a little idea about what I am saying here.

And I was a Marketing Product Manager, with international responsibilities for high tech products. No doubt there are many others here with marketing experience. It doesn't take any special expertise to want corporations to be competent and easy to work with, nor does wishing that alter the reality.

It should be unacceptable for any company to provide poor customer service! There is nothing really that would justify that! Because after all the truth of the matter is that we can do whatever we do as long as we do it right. Problems are never about what we have done, they are just about HOW we did it.
They do have the right to be elective, selective, expensive but they need to be nice, professional and care for a reputation! This online discussion right here is already a walk backwards for their business.

In an ideal world you would be correct. In case you haven't noticed the real world is full of incompetence and rude behavior. It does help to complain back to someone above the source of the problem, to post accurate reviews (negative where appropriate), and ultimately take your business to someone who you feel will treat you right. But just complaining that they should be more competent is a bit silly: of course they should. I'm guessing you never worked in a large corporation...

Greg

[valhalla360]

I got a similar response from them. The part the ticked me off is if they have age or value limits, don't make me fill out the form and then send a cryptic response that gives no clue why it wasn't accepted.

Have the limits right up front so I don't waste an hour filling out forms only t be told no.

[Barra]

Dont feel bad OP they did you a favour - If you actually look at the PANTYarse policy in detail its actually a pretty poor one in a number of areas.

Basically unless you burn it or sink it you dont get much coverage...

Been with em for 3 years but on the lookout for a better policy right now.

Part of it could be the different policies between different versions of Pantyarse as I cant remember the previous German policy being so bad but my new Australian one is very poor indeed

[Smokeys Kitchen]

Originally Posted by exMaggieDrum

I found BoatUS to be bureaucratic and expensive. I went with Chubb through a Seattle broker and have been very happy. My boat is from 1981 so not new. I expected them to require a survey but they did not. I am sure I will have to have one at a future renewal at some point. My broker is Rich Haynie. They have been great.

+1 on Rich Haynie I have a commercial policy through them.

[SeaSon]

Boat us covered my '76 trawler, no issue.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Barra

Dont feel bad OP they did you a favour - If you actually look at the PANTYarse policy in detail its actually a pretty poor one in a number of areas.

Basically unless you burn it or sink it you dont get much coverage...

Been with em for 3 years but on the lookout for a better policy right now.

Part of it could be the different policies between different versions of Pantyarse as I cant remember the previous German policy being so bad but my new Australian one is very poor indeed

I don't agree.. lightning strike in the 90's.. prompt settlement.. then in 08 I was heading to Madiera from the Algarve and hit some bad weather with waves over deck.. within 24 hrs the fore half of the boat developed heavy yellow/brown staining on hull and deck.. assumed chemical spillage as lots of shipping.. got to Funchal and rang them.. a surveyor was flown out in 48hrs.. turned out to be caused by a bare wire contacting the pulpit.. never knew it could act that fast or so dramaticaly.. even started breaking down the ali toerails..
Not covered which was reasonable as I should not have just made a cursory check after being dragged onto the previous month in Olhau.. did not notice the pinched wire when I returned my bow nav lights to the 'unbent' position... Duhh.
However.. no effect on my premium or their wllingness to give me cover..
I cannot fault them..

[Lizzy Belle]

I can see the OP is upset, for which I am sorry, but ... I can't help feel this is "Much Ado About Nothing".
Asking a company for coverage for a $30k boat when they start at $250k or whatever the exact numbers are isn't going to result in coverage.

Many other companies are happy to insure a $30k boat, so you can still pick and choose the one right for you.

My boat is 10 years older and worth about $15k less then the OP's, and not every company is willing to insure her. So I picked the best policy that was available.
I ended up with a great policy at a good price, so I'm happy it took some doing in the end

This only covers the Netherlands plus 20 miles or so offshore tho - after that, I'm on my own, unless I take on a vetted (by the insurers) crew member. Sigh.

I could get very upset about that, cos I can't even insure the boat for a simple weekend sail to the UK. But it is what it is, so I have a choice: take my chances, or stay close to home. Or make damn sure I sink right in the middle of the shipping lane, which is actually one of the most dangerous parts of the whole trip ... and all the companies cover that part. Go figure