posting to forums may invalidate your insurance

[redneckrob]

Originally Posted by Dogscout

As I said in Post #37 of this thread. Faulty Workmanship is stated in my policy as what is not covered.

You would certainly have a better case, requesting coverage of a loss if the work was performed by a professional rather than a do-it-yourself hack.

Yay, finally someone who has one of these unicorn clauses. Please do take a picture of it so we can see it and let us know the company so we can avoid it.

[Shanachie]

What many of you don't seem to understand is that insurance is a strategy game. You probably should have taken some business classes in college. Expecting corporations to do the right thing is naive.



If your boat is sunk, well, there's not much to debate. You have hull value. The insurance company will pay you because the situation is clear. Getting lawyers involved just ups the cost.


If you sustain damage, it will try to pay you the least amount possible, often much less than the actual cost. There is a judgment call here. When is the payment so low that you will hire an attorney?


If the insurance company thinks it can get away with it, it will lowball you and not have an ounce of regret about it. It knows you will lose money if you sue.



If you cause damage to another boat or a marina, the insurance company has a legion of attorneys to argue that the other insurance company should pay for the damage.


Sometimes, your boat will get seized while that argument is going on. So it goes.


The solution is only to insure against catastrophic losses that you can not afford. This reduces what you pay and eliminates touchy situations in which an insurance company is trying to screw you for 2K.


Insurance companies make a lot of money because people pay more to insure against minor losses. Do you have a $500 deductible? It should be 2K or more. You would never file a $500 claim.


My wife has healthcare.gov insurance. It costs $300 a month to reduce copays from $75 to $10. How does that make sense? She goes to the doctor once or twice a year.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Shanachie

What many of you don't seem to understand is that insurance is a strategy game. You probably should have taken some business classes in college. Expecting corporations to do the right thing is naive.



If your boat is sunk, well, there's not much to debate. You have hull value. The insurance company will pay you because the situation is clear. Getting lawyers involved just ups the cost.


If you sustain damage, it will try to pay you the least amount possible, often much less than the actual cost. There is a judgment call here. When is the payment so low that you will hire an attorney?


If the insurance company thinks it can get away with it, it will lowball you and not have an ounce of regret about it. It knows you will lose money if you sue.



If you cause damage to another boat or a marina, the insurance company has a legion of attorneys to argue that the other insurance company should pay for the damage.


Sometimes, your boat will get seized while that argument is going on. So it goes.


The solution is only to insure against catastrophic losses that you can not afford. This reduces what you pay and eliminates touchy situations in which an insurance company is trying to screw you for 2K.

Wow ! Just Wow !

[Bycrick]

For every time I’ve seen an insurance company or at-fault individual try and weasel out of paying for damages, I’ve seen "victims" trying to get more money or work done than they were entitled to. For example, the starboard side of a hull needing to be repainted after repairs. Owner: You need to paint both sides or the new paint won’t match the 7-year-old paint on the port side. Or: I’ll get estimates for a high price and then fix it myself and pocket the difference.

In general, insurance policies are absolutely clear about what they will or won’t cover. Since the insurance company wrote the contract and you could only "take it or leave it," in most jurisdictions any "vague language" like "Faulty workmanship" will be construed in your favor, not the company's. Most policies spend far more words telling you what they WON'T cover than what they will. A good example is the case where a client had a restaurant with open sides and a very expensive fake thatched roof. The fire insurance coverage specified the numerous building on the site. But, in the "Definitions," a "Building" was defined as a structure that had solid walls and roof. Oops. No coverage. It wasn’t "hidden" or sneaky, you just had to read the policy, as written.

[goboatingnow]

Funnily I’ve never seen insurance companies low ball claims. In fact the opposite as an army of “ fellow travellers “ gets involved when it’s an insurance claim , surveyors , yard personal all quote high and the company just “ writes a check “

I mentioned this to an insurance company and she said that material Damage claims are peanuts compared to personal injury claims and insurance is “ happy “ to pay out.

[Shanachie]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Funnily I’ve never seen insurance companies low ball claims.

Well, my friend, you must live a sheltered life. Or perhaps things are done differently in Europe.


Across the U.S., there are tens of thousands of attorneys making good livings representing people who have been low-balled or denied claims by insurance companies.


That's not just personal injury. We're talking hurricanes, flooding, fires, fender-benders, water damage, theft, vandalism, travel claims and a host of other issues.


If insurance companies were as benevolent as you believe, these lawyers would be out of business. Instead, they're driving BMWs because they're winning much of the time.


It helps to understand how U.S. insurance companies work.


In the world of publicly traded companies, greed is good, although CEOs prefer to call it maximizing shareholder value. Higher profits are why the stock market keeps going up.


Insurance companies are unusual in that they are more like casinos than the traditional firm that manufactures products and tries to sell them to us.


And they generate profits like casinos. In 2020, the U.S. property and casualty insurance industry generated net profits of more than 23 percent, according to Investopedia.


That's huge. It's why investors like me own shares in insurance companies.



Because insurance companies aren't manufacturing products, they have a huge pool of money from premiums that they invest in stocks, bonds, real estate, hedge funds, bitcoin and whatever.


The keys to increasing insurance profits are to invest well, oversell policies and limit claims.



Funny thing, insurance premiums tend to go up when the stock market goes down. It has nothing to do with risk, just the company trying to protect its profits.


Overselling policies means adding optional coverage you will never use and tiny deductibles that you don't need. That's money in the bank, like extended warranties on appliances.



Insurance adjusters don't get rated in their jobs by how well they treat customers. They're judged by how well they limit claims. You could write a book on all of the ploys they have.


Overall, they do well. Investopedia says three percent of policy holders collect on claims each year.



Homeowners and auto policies generate a flood of cash at relatively low risk. My wife and I have probably paid 150K or so over the last 30 years and received maybe 50K in hurricane and fender-bender claims.


If you read this forum, you know that most marine insurance companies are out of business. In the U.S., the bulk of those that remain also write home and auto policies.


Boat insurance is high risk because of "black swan" events such as hurricanes that can wreck thousands of boats at a time. So why are they issuing policies?


It's because they hope to get you to bundle your home and auto policies with them when you buy boat insurance. That's where the profits are.



If you bundle all three together, you have a much better chance of collecting on claims as well as getting a decent rate.


If you have boat insurance only, you likely have a policy because state regulations generally prohibit them from cherry-picking customers too much.


So the insurance companies look for ways to weed out some or many of these policies -- premium hikes, bans on liveaboards and old boats, no liability-only coverage, difficulty in collecting claims.


It ain't pretty, except for investors, but it's what it is.

[goboatingnow]

It's because they hope to get you to bundle your home and auto policies with them when you buy boat insurance. That's where the profits are.

I think with the exception of Zurich , who are now not writing boat policies anymore . None of my boat insurers are in the home or auto business, most are Lloyd’s retail brokers

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Shanachie

Well, my friend, you must live a sheltered life. Or perhaps things are done differently in Europe.


Across the U.S., there are tens of thousands of attorneys making good livings representing people who have been low-balled or denied claims by insurance companies.


That's not just personal injury. We're talking hurricanes, flooding, fires, fender-benders, water damage, theft, vandalism, travel claims and a host of other issues.

I can't speak to other the other types of claims you mention and the vast majority of marine claims I did investigate were through Canadian underwriters although, I did quite a few for US companies too when their clients had issues north of the 49th.

Curiously I never once saw a claimant short changed but frequently saw them overpaid, sometimes grossly overpaid and sometimes clearly when they should not have received a penny.

[mandofergi]

Sorry new to the forum I'm really surprised at the ignorant, poluted, and tenacious responses coming from a group of cruising sailors. Wow order up some chill pills and relax! Just think how fortunate you are to be able to be in a position to ask questions about this kind of life style you have embarked on or preparing to. I know I will be asking quite a few DUH questions. I was brought up to believe the only stupid question is the one not asked.so when I post one of those DUH questions please please be kind and patiient.



Regards

[gamayun]

Originally Posted by mandofergi

Sorry new to the forum I'm really surprised at the ignorant, poluted, and tenacious responses coming from a group of cruising sailors. Wow order up some chill pills and relax! Just think how fortunate you are to be able to be in a position to ask questions about this kind of life style you have embarked on or preparing to. I know I will be asking quite a few DUH questions. I was brought up to believe the only stupid question is the one not asked.so when I post one of those DUH questions please please be kind and patiient.



Regards

Don't let them get to you personally, Mandofergi. It's just my guess but I believe only about 10% of CF posters are actually "seriously" cruising whereas the rest of us get out from time to time or we wanna get out once we actually own a boat. Maybe you can create a poll to see how many in each category? (Just kidding

[Cari Laut]

Originally Posted by Sailshabby

Said the secret insurance agent. Insurance should only cover acts of God?

Even then, they usually don't...

I had sinkhole damage to a home. They wiggled out of payment on a technicality because they could not "visually inspect" underground repairs.


Recently had a friend lose their home to a landslide. Also not covered.



Insurance is a scam.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Funnily I’ve never seen insurance companies low ball claims....

Me too. IME, I've always gotten settlements that exceed what I felt was reasonable. I never felt short changed, unless overcharging for medical stuff (insurance and fees) in general counts. Maybe I'm too reasonable in my expectations, but I don't think so.


I have definitely witnessed cases where people did not understand their coverage. For example, saying "It is simple. Your boat sank" is not simple. If the policy did not include consequential loss coverage and the sinking was cause by a maintenance item, like a hose failure (it probably was), you may find you have no coverage (the cause was lack of maintenance, which is not covered).

[boatpoker]

I suspect most complaints are from people who did not understand what they'd signed or didn't even read the contract til' the poop stuck to the wall.

Admittedly some are hard reading but many jurisdictions require plain english contracts. If you are not in one of them you could petition your legislators for change.

[Bycrick]

I once had a law professor (a sitting Federal judge at the time) who asserted that insurance policies were the best contracts anywhere. They’ve been carefully honed, by armies of attorneys, over tens of decades. Any time the company lost a court case that they didn’t think they should have, the language was polished up to make sure it didn’t happen again. So you’re not likely to find much ambiguity in an insurance policy. If you didn’t read it, or didn’t understand it before you signed and paid, then it’s your fault if it doesn’t cover what you think or feel it should.

When people complain about "the technicalities," they usually mean that they didn’t read or understand the rules of the game, and got caught not following them.

[clakiep]

Insurance ? Thats why an insurance broker might be useful, if You find one who defends also the insured party. If the broker has many clients he can threaten to take them all to another insurer.

Capt. Claus - ocean tramp of the eighties