Cruisers Forum Insurance ?

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Capt Gill

British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT)?

Yes, they control entry into the unihabited Chagos atolls.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

This is a curious story, and contrary to what I have seen. The yard isn't responsible, unless the mooring was clearly unsuitable (and they probably used it on a regular basis and it seemed fine). So they don't pay. Your insurance covers you from the loss, same as if your own anchor had dragged.


The weird part is how the insurance company assumed the liability for YOU dragging. You are even less liable for the damage to the other boat than the yard. The second boat should have paid for their own damage.


One nice thing, normally, about insurance is they have a better understanding of who is liable, and don't quibble about it. If the yard were responsible, their insurance would have paid regardless of the yard's objections (and perhaps your insurance subrogated against theirs without your knowing). And if you weren't responsible, your insurance wouldn't have paid, no matter how bad you felt about hitting him.

The mooring was clearly unsuitable for a boat the size of mine. I live in the town where the marina and after the incident asked around to learn who set them and he was told by the marina they were for 25’ boats. My boat was 44’.

The trouble is that you’d have to hire someone to pull the mooring up, measure it, and hire an expert to testify that it was inadequate, use your lawyers or hire local lawyers to represent you, and then refute any contrary evidence that the marina presented. I definitely wanted them to pursue it because I was afraid that by accepting financial responsibility rather than proving it was the marinas grossly undersized moorings, it might mean my premium would go up. But apparently it’s not worth $20,000 for an insurance company to go through all that so they just wrote a check and moved on. As it turned out my fears of an increase in premiums were unfounded so from the boat owners perspective it doesn’t matter if fault is correctly assigned.

But my point in telling this story was to illustrate that even the most careful of boaters with a long history of no claims, through no fault of their own, can find themselves in a position where it suddenly costs their insurance company quite a lot of money. So, it would be pretty tough to choose a group of low risk individuals to form a coop that would share each other’s risk as has been proposed in this thread.

[Matt Johnson]

Scratch this one off the list. I just received a policy cancellation from Bavaria saying that they are no longer writing liability only for non-EU residents.

Back to searching for insurance after three carefree years

Matt

Originally Posted by funjohnson

https://bavaria-ag.de

For anyone outside the States, this company will write liability only policies. Our is $2 million for $290 a year. No survey needed (At least when we signed up in 2017).

-Matt

[emueller]

I have tried to digest this, and some other related, threads. Forgive me if I missed the answer; please point me in the right direction...

It seems there are no liability-only policies in the US for boats over 30' (BoatUS/GEICO) or 35' (Progressive). I normally insure my boats through seamanship and prudence (so far, so good) but as has been pointed out, you cannot get hauled for dry storage without a liability policy.

Comment: There are varying levels of liability: a boat on the hard is a safer risk than a boat sailed ANY time! It seems to me that a storage liability policy could be profitable as claims would be relatively few. The premium could vary with location (i.e. tropical weather-prone yards and marinas would be higher), wet vs. dry storage, etc.

If anyone knows of such a policy, please let me know! Otherwise, I suppose I'll do what others have and bite the bullet on a comprehensive policy and cancel when I go sailing.

[robertmfranklin]

Approach never occurred to me. Insure on the hard where it is required, cancel when launched. My sailing is about 3 months. I wonder if an insurance company would work with that approach. Probably not. And what it would save if they did. My premium is $350. How much might I save. At that level the premium is probably weighted in favor of the paperwork and administrative cost more than the risk.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by emueller

It seems there are no liability-only policies in the US for boats over 30' (BoatUS/GEICO) or 35' (Progressive). I normally insure my boats through seamanship and prudence (so far, so good) but as has been pointed out, you cannot get hauled for dry storage without a liability policy.

Maybe not in the USA, but I have personal experience with one yacht club that doesn't require insurance at all; they only "recommend" it. So I suspect there are still a few places out there. Might have to go far off the beaten path though.

Originally Posted by emueller

Comment: There are varying levels of liability: a boat on the hard is a safer risk than a boat sailed ANY time! It seems to me that a storage liability policy could be profitable as claims would be relatively few. The premium could vary with location (i.e. tropical weather-prone yards and marinas would be higher), wet vs. dry storage, etc.

I'd love to know if this is true. It's not obvious to me. I'm sure it is true in some circumstances, but I can think of many "on the hard" situations which could pose a greater risk; winters in Newfoundland for example.

Originally Posted by emueller

If anyone knows of such a policy, please let me know! Otherwise, I suppose I'll do what others have and bite the bullet on a comprehensive policy and cancel when I go sailing.

Again, I'd like to see details on if this could work. I bet your rebate will not be equally pro-rated by month. Besides, I bet this trick will wear thin pretty quickly. Underwriters and brokers will soon catch on to this strategy. Must be a real pita for the broker to manage, and certainly would cut into their revenue.

[sailingharry]

One thought on a liability-only policy. I bought my last boat for an absolute song -- it was FSBO and not moving, and they took my offer of less than 50% of asking. Asking was high for the specific boat, but low for the model. So, bottom line, I had a boat that I paid far to little for. So, went to insure it -- and BoatUS argued about my declared hull value, said they couldn't do it for more than the sale price. I solved that, but here's the thought.


If you have owned the boat a while, it might make it easier. But suppose you asked for a comprehensive of, say, $10K. That might be a fraction of the hull value, but it would make the premium way low. You could sweeten the pot more by a nice hefty deductible -- say $5K. Now, granted, you'll be paying for a nearly worthless comprehensive policy, but it will be priced a nearly nothing.


I must say, though, that if you find the cost of a policy too expensive such that you want to cancel when you are sailing, then it tells me you probably don't have the resources to cover the harm you might cause when you are out there (your steering fails just as you are coming into a harbor, etc). I know that it doesn't hurt YOU to say "bummer dude, but I can't pay to fix it." But really, is that the kind of person you are? Now, true, you may be the kind of person who is frugal and also has the money to pay out of pocket for a $10,000 paint job that you damaged -- but that's a rare person.


Me? I can't afford to replace my boat, nor can I afford to cover a $1M lawsuit if I somehow maimed someone. But that's me.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

...I must say, though, that if you find the cost of a policy too expensive such that you want to cancel when you are sailing, then it tells me you probably don't have the resources to cover the harm you might cause when you are out there (your steering fails just as you are coming into a harbor, etc). I know that it doesn't hurt YOU to say "bummer dude, but I can't pay to fix it." But really, is that the kind of person you are? Now, true, you may be the kind of person who is frugal and also has the money to pay out of pocket for a $10,000 paint job that you damaged -- but that's a rare person.

Isn't this why most comprehensive policies include coverage for uninsured boaters.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I'd love to know if this is true. It's not obvious to me. I'm sure it is true in some circumstances, but I can think of many "on the hard" situations which could pose a greater risk; winters in Newfoundland for example.

Again, I'd like to see details on if this could work. I bet your rebate will not be equally pro-rated by month. Besides, I bet this trick will wear thin pretty quickly. Underwriters and brokers will soon catch on to this strategy. Must be a real pita for the broker to manage, and certainly would cut into their revenue.

For the OP's specific goal -- low cost liability only -- his assessment is correct, I think. Even in Newfoundland, I'm not sure what the LIABILITY risk is. If the boat blows over, the owner isn't at fault (or shouldn't be -- he didn't place the stands!). The risk of fire is nearly zero, unless the boat is on shore power. Same with fuel spills. And if the snow load caves in the roof, that's comprehensive, not liability. Now, if he's crazy enough to work on the boat in those conditions, and knocks over another boat's stands, well, there's a case for liability. But much less risk than negotiating a tight marina fairway on a windy day.


As far as not being pro-rated, I think you are right. I seem to recall some sort of words in a policy I had about a minimum compensation -- say 50% of the policy for the first day, and then pro-rating the rest. But I did get a fairly decent refund when I sold my last boat 3 months before the policy end, so maybe it's 50% for the first day, the next 179 days are free, and pro rated after that (that sounds like a reasonable theory to me).

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Isn't this why most comprehensive policies include coverage for uninsured boaters.

Indeed. And I do have it. Where it becomes a concern is a boater who is willing to take the risk to cover damage HE does (takes a lightning strike, runs into a rock, whatever), but didn't really consider that an irresponsible boater would crash into his boat, total it, and not pay up.



Fortunately, I don't have to worry. But I wonder -- if that happens to me, and I file a claim, does that count as a claim that would then result in higher rates? I often wonder the same thing about car insurance -- if I come out and find my car bashed in, does filing a claim raise my rates? Never happened (land or sea), so I have no idea. I tend to avoid claims even if it would be covered.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

For the OP's specific goal -- low cost liability only -- his assessment is correct, I think. Even in Newfoundland, I'm not sure what the LIABILITY risk is. If the boat blows over, the owner isn't at fault (or shouldn't be -- he didn't place the stands!). The risk of fire is nearly zero, unless the boat is on shore power. Same with fuel spills. And if the snow load caves in the roof, that's comprehensive, not liability. Now, if he's crazy enough to work on the boat in those conditions, and knocks over another boat's stands, well, there's a case for liability. But much less risk than negotiating a tight marina fairway on a windy day.

Yes, I was mixing comprehensive with liability. My bad.

Funny thing about stands though ... In my experience it is the norm to set up your own stands or positioned your cradle. The first placed I've hauled where this was done by marina staff is at my current location.

Originally Posted by sailingharry

As far as not being pro-rated, I think you are right. I seem to recall some sort of words in a policy I had about a minimum compensation -- say 50% of the policy for the first day, and then pro-rating the rest. But I did get a fairly decent refund when I sold my last boat 3 months before the policy end, so maybe it's 50% for the first day, the next 179 days are free, and pro rated after that (that sounds like a reasonable theory to me).

That's what I was thinking. I know it works that way for motorcycle insurance, which also has short seasons (at least up my way).

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

Indeed. And I do have it. Where it becomes a concern is a boater who is willing to take the risk to cover damage HE does (takes a lightning strike, runs into a rock, whatever), but didn't really consider that an irresponsible boater would crash into his boat, total it, and not pay up.

I'd view it as part of my risk assessment. If I thought there was a significant enough risk of being damaged by an uninsured boater, I'd make sure I have the coverage. But in my limited experience it is a standard feature of comprehensive insurance packages. But maybe that's not the norm...?

Originally Posted by sailingharry

Fortunately, I don't have to worry. But I wonder -- if that happens to me, and I file a claim, does that count as a claim that would then result in higher rates? I often wonder the same thing about car insurance -- if I come out and find my car bashed in, does filing a claim raise my rates? Never happened (land or sea), so I have no idea. I tend to avoid claims even if it would be covered.

Good question. One would hope it doesn't, but insurance companies are there to make money, not worry about what is fair.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Funny thing about stands though ... In my experience it is the norm to set up your own stands or positioned your cradle. The first placed I've hauled where this was done by marina staff is at my current location.

Must be a regional or national thing. Here on the Chesapeake, most boat yards clearly stipulate that no one but yard personnel will move stands. Some will even do it once for free -- but you must not do it yourself.


Also regional -- I note that "up north" in New England ("down south" for you guys!), cradles are the norm and mast-out winter storage is the norm. Down here, cradles don't exist, and no one pulls their mast for winter storage. Strange variations!



My new boat is much bigger than my old boat, so I'm going from a tiny yard (literally his front yard, can hold about 20 boats in winter storage!) to a "real" marina for a bottom job as soon as the virus breaks, and so I've been getting a crash course in marina rules. LOL.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by emueller

I have tried to digest this, and some other related, threads. Forgive me if I missed the answer; please point me in the right direction...

It seems there are no liability-only policies in the US for boats over 30' (BoatUS/GEICO) or 35' (Progressive). I normally insure my boats through seamanship and prudence (so far, so good) but as has been pointed out, you cannot get hauled for dry storage without a liability policy.

Comment: There are varying levels of liability: a boat on the hard is a safer risk than a boat sailed ANY time! It seems to me that a storage liability policy could be profitable as claims would be relatively few. The premium could vary with location (i.e. tropical weather-prone yards and marinas would be higher), wet vs. dry storage, etc.

If anyone knows of such a policy, please let me know! Otherwise, I suppose I'll do what others have and bite the bullet on a comprehensive policy and cancel when I go sailing.

This is strange. I know if an insurer that has a liability only policy in effect in my 50’ monohull in the USA. Progressive.

Don’t know what to tell you but they insured mine.

[GordMay]

Greetings and welcome aboard the CF, emueller.