Surveys and insurance requirements

[tehmarks]

Firstly, yes, it's ultimately my fault for not checking the requirements in advance of having a survey conducted, but I was a bit surprised to receive this today from GJW:

 

Quote

Thank you for uploading the Survey Report in respect of HAMLET however the report supplied does not comply with the Survey requirements you have agreed with, when purchasing your policy:

 

Survey Conditions

 

We require a full out of water survey by a qualified marine surveyor which has been carried out in the last 10 years and all surveyors recommendations have been carried out.

 

A full survey is an exhaustive inspection covering every detail affecting the boat’s condition and safety including a thorough evaluation of all onboard systems, structural integrity of all components, the extent of existing problems, suggestions for upgrades and needed repairs. The boat is best inspected both in and out of the water and if possible underway for a trail run. For steel hulls we also require a hull plate thickness test and the minimum thickness we accept is 4mm.

 

The survey should also provide an estimate of the boat’s Current Market Value.

 

A hull survey is not acceptable.

(My bold)

 

I politely told them to fuck off, because I think that is three steps removed from being reasonable. Anyone want to suggest alternative insurers with a more realistic outlook?

[Alan de Enfield]

10 minutes ago, tehmarks said:

Firstly, yes, it's ultimately my fault for not checking the requirements in advance of having a survey conducted, but I was a bit surprised to receive this today from GJW:

 

(My bold)

 

I politely told them to fuck off, because I think that is three steps removed from being reasonable. Anyone want to suggest alternative insurers with a more realistic outlook?

 

Why do you consider the fact a survey  for insurance should cover everything that affects the boats condition and safety to be unreasonable ?

 

You could always insure it 3rd party only - that's good enough for a licence, but obviously if it sinks you lose your money,

 

[PD1964]

How old is the boat? Are they requesting the survey before they insure because of the age of the boat and were you previously insured with GJW?

[Alan de Enfield]

8 minutes ago, PD1964 said:

How old is the boat? Are they requesting the survey before they insure because of the age of the boat and were you previously insured with GJW?

 

I don't read it as he is objecting to the need for his survey, just the fact that the survey he has (a hull only) was not acceptable as it was not in compliance with their T&Cs.

 

 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Alan de Enfield

[TheBiscuits]

 

You could also get the surveyor back to update the existing survey.  He shouldn't need to redo the hull survey, just add the other bits to it.  You might not even need to slip it again if he inspected the sterngear at the time of the original survey.  Speak to him and ask.

 

Did you request an insurance survey or just a hull survey?

[tehmarks]

1 minute ago, PD1964 said:

How old is the boat? Are they requesting the survey before they insure because of the age of the boat and were you previously insured with GJW?

About to turn thirty, so yes, the survey is for insurance purposes. Wasn't covered by GJW last year, but I have been a customer of theirs in the past.

 

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Why do you consider the fact a survey  for insurance should cover everything that affects the boats condition and safety to be unreasonable ?

I appreciate I see it from my perspective and not the perspective of an insurer making a decision based on fact and policy only, but I'm struggling to identify any serious risks that a full survey will likely discover, that the BSSC will not have discovered, that aren't engine-related. On the subject of the engine, it doesn't take thirty years for an abused engine to show itself as being unreliable. And in this instance that's irrelevant, as it's a new engine with circa 700 hours total.

4 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

You could also get the surveyor back to update the existing survey.  He shouldn't need to redo the hull survey, just add the other bits to it.  You might not even need to slip it again if he inspected the sterngear at the time of the original survey.  Speak to him and ask.

 

Did you request an insurance survey or just a hull survey?

 

I've just sent him an email as I figure it'll be of potential interest to other customers if nothing else! I'm going to try a few others — I disagree with their requirement in principle, so I'd really rather avoid getting the surveyor back to tell me that my engine is in fine condition, my electrics are safe and my stove isn't about to kill me.

I got a survey for insurance purposes specifically (but as noted, I should have checked the requirements of my prospective insurer myself, and more carefully. No problem at all with the surveyor!)

[Tracy D'arth]

39 minutes ago, tehmarks said:

Firstly, yes, it's ultimately my fault for not checking the requirements in advance of having a survey conducted, but I was a bit surprised to receive this today from GJW:

 

(My bold)

 

I politely told them to fuck off, because I think that is three steps removed from being reasonable. Anyone want to suggest alternative insurers with a more realistic outlook?

 Craft insure are reasonable and I believe Saga don't want a survey.

[Alan de Enfield]

15 minutes ago, tehmarks said:

I appreciate I see it from my perspective and not the perspective of an insurer making a decision based on fact and policy only, but I'm struggling to identify any serious risks that a full survey will likely discover, that the BSSC will not have discovered, that aren't engine-related.

 

As I am sure you are aware the BSSC doesn't cover the suitability, insurabilty or safety of the boat, it only covers aspects that could be a risk to other boaters, towpath 'passers by' or 'Navigation authority staff'. 

 

Nothing to do with (for example the exhaust outlet being less than (say) 10" above the water line) the boat remaining floating., 

The BSSC requirements for electrical wiring is primarily only advisory not mandatory - the insurers probably want to know that the wiring is not all choc-blocks and insulating tape, & there are many other similar things that could be affected.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Alan de Enfield

[tehmarks]

22 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

As I am sure you are aware the BSSC doesn't cover the suitability, insurabilty or safety of the boat, it only covers aspects that could be a risk to other boaters, towpath 'passers by' or 'Navigation authority staff'. 

 

Nothing to do with (for example the exhaust outlet being less than (say) 10" above the water line) the boat remaining floating., 

Oh, for sure. But the exhaust (not) being 5" above the waterline has already been covered by the survey that I do have. It'd be a bit of a shit  pointless survey otherwise, would it not?

 

22 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The BSSC requirements for electrical wiring is primarily only advisory not mandatory - the insurers probably want to know that the wiring is not all choc-blocks and insulating tape, & there are many other similar things that could be affected.

The choc block is unlikely to have sprouted of is own accord in the 29th year. It's a risk which exists for a craft of any age old enough to have been tinkered with.

As I say, I do appreciate why they may have have taken the stance that they have, but it appears to be outwith the position of other insurers, and ultimately I'm going to exercise my ability to do business with more reasonable companies.

[ditchcrawler]

28 minutes ago, tehmarks said:

Oh, for sure. But the exhaust (not) being 5" above the waterline has already been covered by the survey that I do have. It'd be a bit of a shit  pointless survey otherwise, would it not?

 

The choc block is unlikely to have sprouted of is own accord in the 29th year. It's a risk which exists for a craft of any age old enough to have been tinkered with.

As I say, I do appreciate why they may have have taken the stance that they have, but it appears to be outwith the position of other insurers, and ultimately I'm going to exercise my ability to do business with more reasonable companies.

If you were going to take the liability of a 30 year lump of steel floating around in a canal against catching fire or possibly having the engine jump out of the bed on a tidal river wouldn't you want a full survey to know its in good order and also worth what its insured for. If the answer is no, then why are you bothering with fully comp insurance?

[tehmarks]

8 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

If the answer is no, then why are you bothering with fully comp insurance?

 

Mainly so that when some cretin, land or water-based, steals my entire life, I'm not left with no possessions, home or recompense.

[JamesWoolcock]

I've never been asked for anything other than just an out of water hull survey.

But then this boat is only 123 years old with a 50 odd year old fit out!

[TheBiscuits]

Just now, JamesWoolcock said:

I've never been asked for anything other than just an out of water hull survey.

But then this boat is only 123 years old with a 50 odd year old fit out!

 

Who do you insure it with?

[Alan de Enfield]

5 minutes ago, tehmarks said:

 

Mainly so that when some cretin, land or water-based, steals my entire life, I'm not left with no possessions, home or recompense.

 

TPFT ?

[JamesWoolcock]

Was with Towergate till they got disinterested with anything slightly challenging.

Shame as I'd had one major claim when CRT tried to sink her at Camp Hill and they were brilliant including an engine rebuild!

Now with Circle Marine via Michael Stimpson.

Very happy, pretty well the same live aboard policy, less money and always a good natter.

[Troyboy]

I own an over 30 year old boat and my insurers required a full out of water survey last year before they would offer fully comp insurance . On contacting a surveyor there appears to be three levels of survey namely hull only, insurance company survey and then full survey. The insurers actually used the term full survey in correspondence but were happy for what my surveyor calls an insurance survey . I think a full survey would be the type a potential purchaser would require but the insurance survey was certainly comprehensive . I tried to find an insurer that didn't require a survey as I had heard Saga didn't require one , that was untrue and I failed miserably so had to stump up for the insurance survey . I wish you well in your search ,but in may be worth clarifying that when an insurer states they require a full out of water survey they will be satisfied with an insurance survey which is slightly cheaper . 

[ditchcrawler]

25 minutes ago, JamesWoolcock said:

Was with Towergate till they got disinterested with anything slightly challenging.

Shame as I'd had one major claim when CRT tried to sink her at Camp Hill and they were brilliant including an engine rebuild!

Now with Circle Marine via Michael Stimpson.

Very happy, pretty well the same live aboard policy, less money and always a good natter.

He called me just after I had renewed, I will contact him this year before renewing

[JamesWoolcock]

3 minutes ago, Troyboy said:

I own an over 30 year old boat and my insurers required a full out of water survey last year before they would offer fully comp insurance . On contacting a surveyor there appears to be three levels of survey namely hull only, insurance company survey and then full survey. The insurers actually used the term full survey in correspondence but were happy for what my surveyor calls an insurance survey . I think a full survey would be the type a potential purchaser would require but the insurance survey was certainly comprehensive . I tried to find an insurer that didn't require a survey as I had heard Saga didn't require one , that was untrue and I failed miserably so had to stump up for the insurance survey . I wish you well in your search ,but in may be worth clarifying that when an insurer states they require a full out of water survey they will be satisfied with an insurance survey which is slightly cheaper . 

There are many folks prepared to carry out a survey, but do check that who ever is asking for the survey, will accept the surveyor you have in mind.

Your mate with a thickness tester will look round your boat for you once it's out of the water, but they may not be accepted by the insurer!!

 

7 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

He called me just after I had renewed, I will contact him this year before renewing

Unlike most in the business,  he's a boater.

[ditchcrawler]

15 minutes ago, JamesWoolcock said:

 

 

Unlike most in the business,  he's a boater.

I know, it was him who persuaded me to go with Tower when he was there many years ago

[JamesWoolcock]

And so say many of us.

They were good, once.

[Ex Brummie]

If you are looking for comprehensive insurance, then it is not unreasonable for an insurer to request a valuation, which requires a full survey to prove the value you expect.

[Troyboy]

3 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

You could also get the surveyor back to update the existing survey.  He shouldn't need to redo the hull survey, just add the other bits to it.  You might not even need to slip it again if he inspected the sterngear at the time of the original survey.  Speak to him and ask.

 

Did you request an insurance survey or just a hull survey?

This is obviously the most cost effective route to take with no need to slip the boat again.  

[blackrose]

4 hours ago, Tracy D'arth said:

 Craft insure are reasonable and I believe Saga don't want a survey.

 

Yes other insurers are available who may not require such an exhaustive survey. The choice is not between that insurer at one extreme and third party insurance at the other, despite what some on here might tell you.

 

Try Craftinsure.

[MoominPapa]

We moved to GJW this time last year. They were happy with a year old hull-only survey for a 30 year old NB. I don't know why they've been so much more difficult with the OP.

 

MP.

[Alan de Enfield]

 

15 minutes ago, MoominPapa said:

I don't know why they've been so much more difficult with the OP.

 

I have mentioned this a time or two in the last couple of months, the marine insurance industry is going thru turmoil at present, with the instruction from Lloyds of London that the industry is unsustainable at present levels and floowing some huge claims Lloyds are changing the requirements from brokers offering marine insurance.

 

They have told each 'provider' that they must produce a business plan showing that their business is sustainable and profitable, the Business plan must be approved by Lloyds before they are allowed to trade.

 

Several provides have alrady had their licence to trade rescinded.

 

As one example It now seems that all business will be only accepted on a 'market value' instead of 'agreed value'.

I have had agreed value insurance for many years and this all came to light when I noticed that my renewal said 'market value' only, on the instruction of Lloyds.

 

I have previously posted extracts from the letters explaining all the wherefores.

 

"For the first time in over 200 years in the history of Lloyds, special measure have been imposed demanding that all Syndicates writing Yacht insurance submit a sustainable business plan, in the absence of which they would be precluded from writing this class of business. This is beacuse the market has spiralled down to a fudamentally unsustainable level of rates resulting in consistent attritional underwriting losses compounded by catastrophic (storm) claims. ........................................

............................. we continue to write yacht business but we are now instructed to increase rates. All insurers are following suit except those who are now precluded from writing yacht insurance ...............................

 

It goes on.

 

The cover on your policy remains unchanged except for the change that the 'Agreed Value' option is no longer available and the following is substituted :

 

If your craft is a total loss the MOST your insurers will now pay is the MARKET VALUE of this item up to the SUM INSURED in YOUR SCHEDULE  (their bold)

 

 

Maybe, this new increased standard of surveys is part of the 'new normal' for boat insurance.

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Alan de Enfield