MartinC

You might want to look at the thread "Narrowboat Builders" on this Forum.

I agree with Tony Brooks. You have to be very careful that you are comparing like for like. Saving £20 on the premium and having a £2k claim excluded is not good news. Marine policies are often very "personal" to the underwriter involved, this dates back to the old "coffee house days" of Lloyds. I examined all the policies from the main players and decided that the one provided by Craftinsure (who are an underwriting agency and not an insurer ) best met my circumstances. Be aware, however, that policy wording can, and do, change from year to year.

No refection on any of the builders you have named, but from my experiences, and the mutitude of postings from people who have had problems with their boatbuilders, go for a ready built production boat. You can see what you are getting, do not have to worry about stage payments and the solvency of your builder, and more importantly the boat will be built to sell and therefore will resell when the time comes, as it will, to upgrade. You only need the cost of one survey, not a surveyor popping in and out at your expense. You have only to look at a lot of the secondhand boats on the market to see that individual choice at the time of build can lead to a boat that is of little interest to potential buyers. I am sure that this post will lead to a lot of controversy and that a production boat will not be your perfect dream. Equally it should not be a nightmare

Try www.craftinsure.com A very simple site, policy underwritten with Zurich group. I have no connection with them, other than as a customer for the past few years.

My experience as well.

Possibly a bit off the original topic but please see my post under Incident Reporting thread: "BW advise me that they will consider withdrawing boat licenses from any hire company which does not give "adequate" lock tuition."

Sorry for previous posting, it "got away". Thanks for the case numbers. The Ombudsman has just posted her 2006/7 report on her site and summaries of the two cases are included. Case 91 appears to "tell off" BW for not complaining to Royal Mail about missing mail! Case 25 summary has little information about time scales so it looks like a Freedom of Information case. This had lead me to look a little more closely at the arrangements and funding of the Ombudsman. No indication as to how the "independent" members of the committee are appointed and no sign of any accounts other than it appears that BW have to pick up most if not all of the tab. A little more "transparency" might not come admiss bearing in mind that our licence fees are contributing to her costs. Martin

Glad to see that Tony has got hold of the report. I tried the Ombudsman. She said "I am afraid I do not index complaints by canal so I am not sure which complaint you are referring to. Full adjudications are not publicly available." I would like to see a copy of the report to see how it fits in with her Terms of Reference. I was about to use the Freedom of Information Act but if Tony can direct me to another source it would be very helpful. As others have said this is getting epidemic and it is time that licence payers took a stand. I would be interested to know if anyone knows if the IWA have shown any concern

If only life were so straightforward. Taking the comparison of your motor accident, if you talk to anyone who has had their car hit by a self drive hire vehicle you may discover that it is not plain sailing. The insurance is in the name of the owner of the vehicle or, in this case, narrowboat. If the hirer does not report the accident or does not co-operate with the insurer, you, as the third party will not make any progress with the insurers. Also the owner may choose not to refer the matter to the insurers in the first place. Unfortunately I have seen quite a few cases like this, sometimes because the more accidents passed on to the hire company's insurers the higher next year's premium! The better hire company will often deal with it "in house" and replace your fender. Some people get very cross with the hire company but legally they are not responsible for the actions of their hirers. Except in exceptional circumstances your claim is against the navigator. There is another point, although slightly "off topic" I wonder how many potential hirers ever bother to check the hire conditions. A lot of them are a total mess with contradictions in the insurance wordings.

Copy of e-mail from BW on this subject: From: "Enquiries HQ General" <Enquiries.hq@britishwaterways.co.uk> Date: 25 June 2007 10:47:18 BST Subject: RE: Licensing Conditions for Leisure Business Craft used for Holiday Hire Thank you for email. British Waterways would only consider that they have the power to revoke a licence for a hire craft if it was proved that the hire company was a fault. Hire companies are required as part of their licence agreement to provide adequate coaching in the use of locks and of the boat (section 8 of the terms and conditions) If a particular hire base or company constantly fails to provide this training and this leads to constant bad boat handling then British Waterways will in the first instance write to the company concerned and if then decided it was required revoke the licence. However if adequate coaching is being given then the hire company can not be held responsible and British Waterways would be able to take no action as hire companies are not responsible for events outside their control (section 4.5) British Waterways have no say on who hire companies can or can not hire to and if they wish to hire to single sex groups then that is their choice to do so although most companies will not do this or require a very large damage deposit before hiring to such groups. Justin Davies Customer Services Advisor British Waterways

BW advise me that they will considering withdrawing boat licenses from any hire company which does not give "adequate" lock tuition. We have all met hirers who have had little or no tuition and, hopefully, have helped them through their first locks. Can I suggest that it is all our interests to report "incidents" like this to force the minority of hire companies involved to mend their ways and make it easier for everyone. Comments from any one?

Would be interested to know a bit more about this. Who is the wriggly worm? The underwriters (Navigators) and not the agency (Craftinsure) have the final say (before it ends up with the FSO).

An update on a couple of replies. Autherley Junction "black hole" has been removed by BW with a promise of a replacement, some time! Great Heywood is still uninviting, and the boatyard charge you £1 for the favour of supplying the service. Had to use it, however, at the end of May as the BW facility at Stone was out, and according to local information had been for a week. A notice on the door at invited you to ring "Steve" on his mobile for "further information"