can insurance companies endanger lives?

[the dude abides]

I am looking to reach out to sailors who have had dealings with Pantaenius Australia. After being struck by lightning I was confirmed by the insurance I had a valid claim. They sent a surveyor onboard. I was constantly asking for his survey and telling them it would really help me. All I got back was confirmation they were going to have a meeting about it to see if it can be released to me. This is a insurance company that states publicly they have experts all over the world to give you that advice and be no1 support for blue water cruisers. They did not. I asked for certain safety checks to be undertaken by an expert and even went as far as stating I consider it life or death. They told me they don’t do that sort of thing. I got dismasted the next year 200 miles away. I get hold of their surveyor and ask if he said anything about my mast or chain plates. He asks me why am I asking him, surely the insurance gave me the report. I tell him they did not so he sent it to me, and in the report were the safety checks he advised to be undertaken, actually he wrote it is understood that these checks will need to be performed, which the insurance did not undertake, did not tell me of, and they knew these had not been completed as I was asking for them, but they gave me full insurance anyway while knowing I was about to cross the Indian Ocean.

So if you have insurance, they can refuse to give you the expert advice or support, the management can actually suppress it and give you full insurance knowing those checks have not been complete and send you across an ocean to your potential death. Imagine if that boom hit a family member and they died and it turned out Pantaenius had a meeting and decided not to disclose information that was relevant due to the health and safety of their own clients. You have full insurance and they tell you they are experts with advisors all over the world to give you assurance as a blue water sailor no matter where you sail. In my experience it is the opposite. They do not give you advice and potentially endanger your life. They still owe me for the marina fees there which they never paid as well. Asked about that - they just ignore me. I had to ask 4 times about the survey till they acknowledged they had it and would have a meeting to see if they can release it and then decided not to.

I am looking for other cruisers who have had the same issue with Pantaenius Australia. According to them there is nothing wrong with this contract protocol. I think sailors need to be aware of this as it endangers peoples lives not disclosing information which is relevant to the safety of the vessel, contrary to good faith and sooner or later it will get someone killed.

Also I noticed they had latent conditions as an exclusion in my agreement. Insurers are not allowed to rely on latent conditions as an exclusion pursuant to the Insurance Contracts Act. Pantaenius Australia were the only provider I could find with latent conditions in their exclusions and it is illegal to contract out of legislation, although perhaps they have changed that now I pointed it out to them. Has anyone out there been denied insurance by Pantaenius due to latent conditions? If so you should consider independent legal advice because it is contracting out of legislation.

I see no moral sensibilities on display with them at all. They are going to fight me to keep this protocol of non disclosure in place as well as they state they did nothing wrong and told me to address everything to their lawyer

[S/V Illusion]

If you are depending on any insurance underwriter to do your due diligence or provide assurance of your safety, your expectations are unrealistic. The responsibility rests with you.

[the dude abides]

I am not. I did get a surveyor onboard but he could not check some things and had a huge back log. I informed the insurance company he can not do a formal check for weeks. I informed them of this and I was under pressure to the marina fees which I was paying for, which they would not respond to and were supposed to pay. I expect some moral sensibilities and for them to disclose relevant information and not to withhold it. Is that too much to ask? You think they should offer full insurance knowing these things have not been ticked off. Both parties are under an obligation of full disclosure so both sides can assess all risks pertaining to the insurable item

[Shrew]

Who hired the surveyor? You or the insurance company? whomever hired and paid for the survey owns the rights to the survey.

There was nothing stopping you from hiring a surveyor. Your urgency to move and the cost is sort of on you. no offense intended.

[wholybee]

The insurance companies' survey is directly at odds with why YOU need a survey. They hire a surveyor to provide evidence that damage is not as bad as you say it is. That it might have been preexisting damage, or that something you did wrong caused it. They are not looking for hidden damage, nor are they looking beyond what the insurance company needs. That is, what will it cost to fix the lightning damage. They are not looking for structural issues that need to be addressed before an ocean crossing.

Your need for a survey is to prove that the damage was caused by a lightning strike, and to look for hidden damage the insurance company wasn't looking for. And/or to find repairs that need to be made unrelated to the strike, but are necessary for safety.

[the dude abides]

ok that is interesting. I was under a valid claim at the time. That was acknowledged. So you think it is prudent for someone to also get their own surveyor as well as the marine surveyor when under an approved claim? That is probably very good advice, although their surveyor did tell me when I asked him about disclosure that the insurance would give it to me, and when he found out they did not even he said that was unreasonable of them not to disclose the information, and that advice was not disclosed or followed. You think they should be offering someone full insurance knowing that and keeping it from their client? Cheers.

[TrentePieds]

Are you perhaps failing to distinguish between a "surveyor" - a professional hired by YOU on a contract basis - and an "insurance inspector", sometimes, and confusingly, also called a "surveyor" and sometimes an "appraiser" - a professional employed by the insurance UNDERWRITER?

A surveyor hired by you is beholden to you. An inspector or appraiser is beholden to the insurance underwriter, whose interests stand, as wholybee said, in direct opposition to yours.

Claims are ALWAYS "valid" in the sense that the insured, in this case you, has an inalienable right to make claims. The underwriter has the inalienable right, and indeed the duty, to REJECT the claim unless it is for an "insured risk" and does not fall specifically within the rubric of "exclusions" specified explicitly in your policy.

Perhaps it is time to read your policy again in the full awareness that an insurance policy is a written contract that defines the precise terms of the bet you made with the underwriter.

TrentePieds

[the dude abides]

No it was a surveyor. The insurance company at first told me to get a marine electrician but I asked for a surveyor (direct lightning strike) When he was finished I asked him for the report and he said the insurance company will give it to me. He did a decent job. I was just now allowed to see it.

My claim was approved when I was asking for it. I also did a lot of the repair at sea. As much as I could since they would not reply to if they were liable for marina costs. Insurance companies and clients are under a duty to disclose all relevant information. DO you think the insurance company should be offering full insurance to someone knowing that relevant safety checks pertaining to the safety of the vessel have not been ticked off as noted by their expert? Cheers

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

Are you perhaps failing to distinguish between a "surveyor" - a professional hired by YOU on a contract basis - and an "insurance inspector", sometimes, and confusingly, also called a "surveyor" and sometimes an "appraiser" - a professional employed by the insurance UNDERWRITER?

A surveyor hired by you is beholden to you. An inspector or appraiser is beholden to the insurance underwriter, whose interests stand, as wholybee said, in direct opposition to yours.
TrentePieds

As a retired SAMS Accredited Marine Surveyor who has done hundreds of claims reports for several underwriters my experience differs from yours ...

On run of the mill claims the underwriter may send out an adjuster. If it was a complicated or substantial claim they will send a surveyor. I was never under any pressure or influence from any underwriter to protect their interests. I was always directed to report the facts. If I felt the need to bring in a specialist I was free to do so. I never did because I was also Marine Corrosion and Marine electrical certified and had several forensic courses under my belt too.

Whether my report benefitted the underwriter or the insured had no influence on future work directed to me.

PS. Not the first complaint we've heard about Pantaenius tho' and I never heard of a case where the insured was denied a
copy of my report.

[the dude abides]

The surveyor did a good job and recommended 2 specialists to go over specific things which I was not informed of. I did ask for one of them though and was told that they do not normally do this sort of thing. Which surprised me as it was to do with my rigging and mast and I had to undertake one of them as preconditional for my insurance. After several requests and asking if there is something regarding contract protocol about disclosure I received a reply saying they would have a meeting to see if it could be released. They never did.

[Jammer]

Insurance companies are not nice and don't do the right thing if it interferes with their bottom line. Got it, next slide please.


As for your situation, you need an attorney, not a poll on a forum.

[wholybee]

I don't doubt that any surveyor is going to do their best at an honest and complete and accurate survey. But once that survey is in the hands of an insurance company, if it shows damage that the insured doesn't know about and isn't asking about, I don't expect the insurance company to share that information.
And my personal experience with an adjuster, is that they "adjust" a payment to something lower than a quoted repair. IE, you have a quote for a repair for $5000, and the adjuster looks at it and says, "no, I think you need to find someone to do the work cheaper, we will offer you $3000."

[valhalla360]

Was this your surveyor or the insurance companies surveyor? It sounds like you might have hired a second surveyor but for reasons unclear, he was too busy or not competent to survey everything...and you didn't push to get it fully surveyed.

It might be nice if the insurance adjustor provides their report but their purpose is to figure out how much the insurance company should pay out. Once they get that number, if they give you the report it's purely a curtesy.

After that it's on you to make sure that covers all the repairs due to the incident and more importantly, that they all are completed.

I think you are expecting far too much hand holding by the insurance company and going on about life & death is more likely to get your policy canceled than scare them into doing more.

[the dude abides]

I was trying to get some feedback as I think this was the 4th time I asked and they kept ignoring me. SO you think it is ok for a insurance company to renew your full policy insurance while not disclosing information regarding the safety of your vessel? they have that information and do not disclose it you. They are actually under a duty to do so. They put their policy up from approx AUD2000 to AUD6000 to get rid of me so I am not with them now. I asked them if they will give me expert advice as advertised but they never replied

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by the dude abides

I was trying to get some feedback as I think this was the 4th time I asked and they kept ignoring me. SO you think it is ok for a insurance company to renew your full policy insurance while not disclosing information regarding the safety of your vessel? they have that information and do not disclose it you. They are actually under a duty to do so. They put their policy up from approx AUD2000 to AUD6000 to get rid of me so I am not with them now. I asked them if they will give me expert advice as advertised but they never replied

If they made a mistake it was in not requiring you to document that all repairs were completed and provide a new survey before issuing the new policy.

Not surprising, they tried to get rid of you. If your comments here reflect how you dealt with them...Once they hear going on about how people are going to die, they are probably thinking you are lawsuit happy and not a good risk.

I think you are confusing what an insurance company does. They provide monetary compensation if there is a coverable event. Yes, there is some due diligence on their end to come to an appropriate amount but you are still responsible for the safety & condition of your boat.