Insurance--DIY fixes that your insurance might not like

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Paul L

I'll try one more time then lets just say we look at business differently. It is purely a business marketing decision whether to keep the specs proprietary or make them publically available. A business has numerous revenue streams, including a business that is listed as a non-profit. You can charge for the full cost of developing and maintaining the specs plus overhead on each page of the document. You could charge a fixed, smaller amount to get some revenue while getting other income from certification, membership, tradeshows, etc. You could publish the specs freely and gather revenue from the other sources. Simply a business marketing decision.

Think charging for each use of Facebook versus Facebook is free to users and advertisers pay. Just a business decision.

Yes, we certainly look at things differently since I actually don't mind paying for things I want and apparently ......

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

Yes, we certainly look at things differently since I actually don't mind paying for things I want and apparently ......

Just like all the users of Cruisers Forum pay each time they use it. Not.
Don't try and make this as some kind of freeloader issue where you are holier than thou. It is a business decision, not a socialist plot.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Just like all the users of Cruisers Forum pay each time they use it. Not.
Don't try and make this as some kind of freeloader issue where you are holier than thou. It is a business decision, not a socialist plot.

My bad. I (apparently) mistakenly assumed that since you would not answer how much you'd be willing to pay, that you expected it for free.

[mitiempo]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

That's just it .... You are not required to follow ABYC if you choose not to.

But if you want insurance - most marinas require it - you need a survey. The surveyors I know use ABYC as a guideline for best practice. If the surveyor finds a deviation from ABYC it is seen by the insurance company and needs to be fixed.

So for the most part ABYC does need to be followed.

[dfelsent]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

That's just it .... You are not required to follow ABYC if you choose not to.

Agree and disagree at the same time.
I am not REQUIRED to follow ABYC. But ABYC is held as a best practice and US based insurers look at SAMS and others surveyor’s surveys and see the lists of deficiencies that often are tied to specific ABYC Standards.
So. I want insurance. So I need to have a survey and response that is acceptable to the underwriter.
Inevitably with a new to me boat there are items that are noted as deficiencies because they do not meet the standards.
I believe in risk mitigation so I want to bring v my boat up to standard. The surveyor will make a specific recommendation for remediation. That’s great.
But if I do additional maintenance and upgrades between surveys and don’t want to guess and drive down a wrong path I need to have a standard to follow.

I don’t have to follow ABYC. I don’t have to have insurance. I don’t have to sail. I don’t have to breathe.

Yes it’s my choice to sail. And accept the ABYC consequences and expense. But don’t pretend that based in the US given the decision to sail I have a real choice of ABYC or not.

Ps. Don’t get me wrong. ABYC is a great resource. I don’t want to say otherwise. I do not always agree with their standards but I understand where they are coming from.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

My bad. I (apparently) mistakenly assumed that since you would not answer how much you'd be willing to pay, that you expected it for free.

The specs are your living, of course you should contribute. I'm just a cruiser living off a time when tech specs were a part of my living.

[john61ct]

Perhaps the state insurance regulatory agencies should fund ABYC, pro-rata on their state policy volume vs the nation.

Or a $10 contribution from each required survey done.

Charging for access to the actual information, consumer DIYers at the same cost as companies / professionals is clearly not in the public interest.

This is public subsidised non-profit work, not a private business after all.

[transmitterdan]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

I'm sorry, but this is completely demented.

If an insurance company recieved NO claims, then the premiums paid are 100% profit.

Insurance companies don't like paying claims.

Knowing a bit about the insurance industry as I do you could rephrase your position like this:

Insurance companies don't like paying higher ratios (claims/premiums) than their competitors.

If insurance companies tighten their standards so much that they never pay a claim they will not get enough business to survive. They have many costs besides claims payment. The insurance business is not what most people think it is. Many people think as you do but they are wrong,

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

The 8 ton elephant in the room:

How many of us know or suspect there is insurance fraud going on and sit quietly or maybe speculate in whispers with neighbors at the doc? A boat mysteriously sinks in the slip, or burns right outside the jetty, or or or...

I think outright fraud is a real problem. But it seems the insurers don’t do much about it. Ever wondered why?

I can not recall witnessing or hearing any stories or fraud.

But the insurers of course "do something about it", they raise everyone's rates to pay for it

[transmitterdan]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

I can not recall witnessing or hearing any stories or fraud.

But the insurers of course "do something about it", they raise everyone's rates to pay for it

Bingo.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by mitiempo

But if you want insurance - most marinas require it - you need a survey. The surveyors I know use ABYC as a guideline for best practice. If the surveyor finds a deviation from ABYC it is seen by the insurance company and needs to be fixed.

So for the most part ABYC does need to be followed.

ABYC is a very open outfit. if anyone has a business plan on how these standards could be delivered free of charge they should join ABYC and put it in place.

[kmacdonald]

I would guess that unless an owner fix was done incorrectly with the INTENT to cause a loss the claim could not be denied. Laws vary in different states so it may depend on where the loss occurs. ABYC suggestions aren't worth the $600 paper they are printed on.

[hellosailor]

thinwater-
I'm guessing that if you asked the insurer a specific question about the policy terms, and they did not make a responsive answer, in writing, that you could follow up by filing a complaint with your state insurance commission. I say guessing because in some states that's pissing in the wind (Florida) while in others, you actually get help.
If boat insurers follow the same working regs as car insurers (which also varies by state and changes yearly) they used to be allowed to drop 2% of their policy holders every year without any stated reason, to being a "troublemaker" could be risky.
But insurers, despite the state and federal regulations about "plain english" language in contracts and regulations requiring a minimum type size, etc., actually DO have their contracts worded and typeset in means specifically intended to make them illegible and incomprehensible. For instance, they'll have it printed a full six or eight inches wide, rather than the two inches you'd see in a newspaper column. Newspapers use short lines because they're easier to follow. Anyone in the typesetting business can tell you a half dozen equally simple ways these contracts are designed to be hard to read, it is documented and formally taught--not just paranoia and guessing.
The good thing about ambiguous language in unilateral "contracts" is that in pretty much all of the US, the courts will interpret it, and hold it, 100% against the party that wrote it that way. The bad news is, you have to take it to court. Or, if you live in the right states, you call those mice insurance commission folks.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

Knowing a bit about the insurance industry as I do you could rephrase your position like this:

Insurance companies don't like paying higher ratios (claims/premiums) than their competitors.

If insurance companies tighten their standards so much that they never pay a claim they will not get enough business to survive. They have many costs besides claims payment. The insurance business is not what most people think it is. Many people think as you do but they are wrong,

The ideal situation for an insurance company is to collect premiums year after year and pay no claims.

If a company was lucky enough to manage that, they would be able to charge lower premiums than other companies and would have plenty of business.

It's a competitive market.

This is why many companies have clauses to reduce their risk. Such as requiring policy holders to be out of cyclone areas during summer, etc.

To suggest that insurance companies actually LIKE paying lots of claims because it "allows" them to raise their premiums is wrong.

A company with much higher premiums than anyone else will struggle to find customers.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

thinwater-
I'm guessing that if you asked the insurer a specific question about the policy terms, and they did not make a responsive answer, in writing, that you could follow up by filing a complaint with your state insurance commission. I say guessing because in some states that's pissing in the wind (Florida) while in others, you actually get help.
If boat insurers follow the same working regs as car insurers (which also varies by state and changes yearly) they used to be allowed to drop 2% of their policy holders every year without any stated reason, to being a "troublemaker" could be risky.
But insurers, despite the state and federal regulations about "plain english" language in contracts and regulations requiring a minimum type size, etc., actually DO have their contracts worded and typeset in means specifically intended to make them illegible and incomprehensible. For instance, they'll have it printed a full six or eight inches wide, rather than the two inches you'd see in a newspaper column. Newspapers use short lines because they're easier to follow. Anyone in the typesetting business can tell you a half dozen equally simple ways these contracts are designed to be hard to read, it is documented and formally taught--not just paranoia and guessing.
The good thing about ambiguous language in unilateral "contracts" is that in pretty much all of the US, the courts will interpret it, and hold it, 100% against the party that wrote it that way. The bad news is, you have to take it to court. Or, if you live in the right states, you call those mice insurance commission folks.

The question was hypothetical. I have never had a claim related to equipment malfunction or failure.


I have asked insurance companies very specific equipment related questions and received purposely vague answers. Your comment about challenging any denial through the state insurance commission is smart, since that forces detailed reasoning and support.


I've never seen a reference to ABYC or USCG regulations in a policy that I have, only a statement along the lines of "failure to do what is reasonably necessary" to prevent a loss. Obviously, that leaves considerable scope for interpretation.