Insurance requirements for narrowboats over 30 years old

[clendee]

Hi folks,

 

Im seeking some advice from here. 
Our narrowboat insurer has informed us that now that our narrowboat has reached 30 years old, they require a full survey approximately every three years?

Is this true for every insurer, ie, is it law, or is it a stipulation of my current insurer?

If anyone can recommend any reasonably good boat insurers that don't have such stringent requirements, that'd be much appreciated.

 

Many thanks,
 

[Alan de Enfield]

It is not law but it is a normal insurers stipulation for the provision of fully comprehensive insurance.

Some insurers are  every 3 years, some (most) are every 4 years and the odd one every 5 years.

You have been lucky so far as many insurers demand a survey at 25 years old.

 

It is unfortunately just another £800~£1000 (every 3 or 4 years) "on cost" for owning an old boat.

 

(I have no experience of this, but I am told that insurers of very old (vintage) boats are specialists and adapt their policy to meet the boat requirements).

 

It is totally understandable from the insurers point of view as the older the boat gets the greater is the 'risk' so the need to minimise the risk by making a surveyor 'sign' to say it will not sink.

The law states you must have a minimum of 3rd party insurance, so you could always go for 3rd party insurance (only) but obviously if it sinks you lose the boat and all the contents, so it depends on what value you place on the boat, and if you can afford to "lose it all".

[David Mack]

Most insurers want a survey every 5 years for boats over 25 or 30 years old, for fully comprehensive cover. A survey is not generally required for third party only cover.

Note also that Towergate, who used to run a special scheme for historic narrow boats, now refuse to insure any boats over 50 (I think) years old.

[clendee]

Thanks for your responses, this is very helpful information.

[noddyboater]

Try GJW, I think they're every 5 years not 3.

You'll probably save a bit of money moving to them anyway,  I know I did.

[Tonka]

But on this very forum there is a thread running on how useless some of the surveyors are. Yet if you have an old boat you have to have a survey

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, Tonka said:

But on this very forum there is a thread running on how useless some of the surveyors are. Yet if you have an old boat you have to have a survey

 

Then you just have to hope to get a useless one (in a useful way) who justs sits and drinks your Tea and eats your chocolate biscuits, fills out the forms without doing any checks and its all done with for the next 3/4/5 years.

Basically you are just paying another £800-£1000** (over 3/4/5 years) in insurance fees.

 

** Lift out, chock up, Surveyor, lift back in.

[___]

As I related on another thread a couple of days ago I have a 53 year old boat which was insured at the time of purchase in 2015 upon the proviso of me supplying an up to date hull survey. I've just renewed for a seventh year with no subsequent requirements for further survey. That's with Haven Knox-Johnston, or whatever they are called this week.

[MtB]

22 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Basically you are just paying another £800-£1000** (over 3/4/5 years) in insurance fees.

 

** Lift out, chock up, Surveyor, lift back in.

 

Surely you just get the survey done at the same time as the boat is docked for blacking.

 

Also, insurance companies are usually happy with a "hull-only" survey which last time I had one done for insurance during docking for blacking, cost me £250 inc VAT. 

 

So your £800-£1,000 is just scare-mongering. Again.

[doratheexplorer]

11 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Surely you just get the survey done at the same time as the boat is docked for blacking.

 

Also, insurance companies are usually happy with a "hull-only" survey which last time I had one done for insurance during docking for blacking, cost me £250 inc VAT. 

 

So your £800-£1,000 is just scare-mongering. Again.

It's totally standard from him, consistently over-inflates costs, often when addressing prospective boaters who are then discouraged.  I don't know why he does it, but I can only think it's some kind of deliberate tactic?

[JamesWoolcock]

I have been quoted every 5 years for an out of water survey which is ridiculous as it really needs to fall at the same time as hull blacking. If the surveyor does a good job it will need re-blacking afterwards as he/she will strip much of it off during the inspection.

I have successfully argued for every 6 years.

This gives me the option of re-blacking every 2 years or 3.

Any insurer who knows about boats will understand. If they don't, then you can be assured they don't know anything about it and should be avoided. In the event of a claim they may turn out to be difficult.

[matty40s]

Collidge asked me for a 25 year survey a couple of years ago, and stipulated every 5 years, however, it was extended to 10 after my survey as the Comastic had kept the hull in such good condition from new.

[David Mack]

42 minutes ago, JamesWoolcock said:

Any insurer who knows about boats will understand.

And that is the problem. Some insurers seem to equate the risks of narrow boating with sailing the high seas.  I understand that a lack of interest in canal boating higher up the organisation led to Towergate's canal specialist leaving, and them losing most of their historic boat business.

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, MtB said:

Surely you just get the survey done at the same time as the boat is docked for blacking.

 

Agreed, if you can do that you save the out/in costs, however, if the insurance co is (as in this case) demanding a 3-yearly survey and your blacking is on a 2-year cycle it will only coincide every 6 years.

It the insurers demand a 5-year survey then again it won't align with your 2-yearly blacking cycle.

 

If you can stretch your blacking to a 3-year cycle then it becomes a little easier but I have found that at 2-years the blacking is all but gone on the waterline anyway. No way could I stretch it to a 3-year blacking cycle.

[AndrewIC]

1 hour ago, matty40s said:

Collidge asked me for a 25 year survey a couple of years ago, and stipulated every 5 years, however, it was extended to 10 after my survey as the Comastic had kept the hull in such good condition from new.

Snap.

[JamesWoolcock]

29 minutes ago, David Mack said:

And that is the problem. Some insurers seem to equate the risks of narrow boating with sailing the high seas.  I understand that a lack of interest in canal boating higher up the organisation led to Towergate's canal specialist leaving, and them losing most of their historic boat business.

I, and this boat been with Towergate for years, and once when I had a sizeable claim, they were absolutely brilliant. Then, out of the blue, they gave me a months notice at renewal. saying that they didn't want my business any longer because of the age of the boat.

So I rang Michael Stimpson, a life long boater who does know about boats, and especially insuring boats and I now have an excellent policy with Circle Marine that costs less than I was paying Towergate.

 

[David Mack]

35 minutes ago, JamesWoolcock said:

I, and this boat been with Towergate for years, and once when I had a sizeable claim, they were absolutely brilliant. Then, out of the blue, they gave me a months notice at renewal. saying that they didn't want my business any longer because of the age of the boat.

So I rang Michael Stimpson, a life long boater who does know about boats, and especially insuring boats and I now have an excellent policy with Circle Marine that costs less than I was paying Towergate.

 

When I bought Belfast, Towergate weren't taking on new old boat business, although they were then continuing to renew existing policies. Mike fixed me up with a policy with A-Plan with whom he had some association at the time. Despite the fact they are based in Poole and don't advertise for inland waterway business they have been great to deal with and reasonably priced (although I have never had to claim).

[Mike Todd]

3 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Then you just have to hope to get a useless one (in a useful way) who justs sits and drinks your Tea and eats your chocolate biscuits, fills out the forms without doing any checks and its all done with for the next 3/4/5 years.

Basically you are just paying another £800-£1000** (over 3/4/5 years) in insurance fees.

 

** Lift out, chock up, Surveyor, lift back in.

But I suspect that it is only beneficial if you do not make a claim. In the end it is the insured person who carries the can not the surveyor. Hence, if the insurance company suspect that you already knew that the hull was not viable then they would quibble over paying out.

[gatekrash]

3 hours ago, Captain Pegg said:

As I related on another thread a couple of days ago I have a 53 year old boat which was insured at the time of purchase in 2015 upon the proviso of me supplying an up to date hull survey. I've just renewed for a seventh year with no subsequent requirements for further survey. That's with Haven Knox-Johnston, or whatever they are called this week.

Agree ref Haven Knox-Johnson (or MS Amlin as they were last year).

 

My lumpy water boat is 1979, surveyed at 25 years old and they wrote to me back then telling me that as long as I stayed with them they wouldn't want another survey done. Boat is now 42 years old and I've never had to re-survey it.

 

Narrowboat is now also insured with them, and they said the same thing to me for that when I asked them about surveys. Hopefully they don't change their mind !