Insurance claims in the event of sinking

[Quattrodave]

3 minutes ago, MtB said:

One of the principles adhered to in the insurance industry is that a claimant must never 'make a profit'

 

I purchased a reasonably rare car a while back, insured it as to what I paid for it.  I was subsequently rear-ended, other parties insurance never asked what I paid for it and paid out market value which was more than I paid. 

Ok there are a few caveats to this example, it was a classic car on a classic policy and I had to send them a number of listings for the particular car for sale, I believe they averaged the price they paid.

[MtB]

2 minutes ago, Quattrodave said:

 

I purchased a reasonably rare car a while back, insured it as to what I paid for it.  I was subsequently rear-ended, other parties insurance never asked what I paid for it and paid out market value which was more than I paid. 

Ok there are a few caveats to this example, it was a classic car on a classic policy and I had to send them a number of listings for the particular car for sale, I believe they averaged the price they paid.

 

 

Selective quoting roolz ok!!!

 

If you re-read my post you'll see this is different. YOU were not the policyholder. 

 

 

The point of the rule I described is to minimise the scope for deliberate insurance fraud. 

[LadyG]

2 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

In which case you need to get onto your insurance co and pay extra for an "agreed value" insurance policy, because currently they will only pay out whatever you paid for it. 

I will ask them about their stance, and if they say, we only pay what you paid (and how would they know this) why they have not made their position clear, they do have some sort of code of conduct.

I can ask them to agree to " agreed value", which would be due to improvements in the vessel plus the general increase in market value.

If your hypothesis was correct, that would mean that nearly all boats currently on the canals are wrongly insured, both over and under.

[haggis]

I wonder if in the event of a total payout an insurance company will accept a figure supplied by the owner. In our experience the boat could only be insured for what we paid for it until we got a professional revaluation as the price of boats had shot up. I know at the time several boat owners on here said the insurance company were happy to insure on the basis of what the owner said the value was  but I do wonder how much they would actually pay out. Probably the market value and it will be up to them to say what that is. 

[wandering]

15 minutes ago, LadyG said:

She told the insurance company that she wanted to value the boat at the £27K, the insurance company issued the policy. That is it from their point of view.

 

He*

 

I don't want to make any profit, merely have my home habitable and returned to form, or at least close to form. If the repairs come to less than 27k, happy days. 

8 minutes ago, LadyG said:

I will ask them about their stance, and if they say, we only pay what you paid (and how would they know this) why they have not made their position clear, they do have some sort of code of conduct.

I can ask them to agree to " agreed value", which would be due to improvements in the vessel plus the general increase in market value.

If your hypothesis was correct, that would mean that nearly all boats currently on the canals are wrongly insured, both over and under.

They requested the receipt of sale and a recent survey 

7 minutes ago, haggis said:

I wonder if in the event of a total payout an insurance company will accept a figure supplied by the owner. In our experience the boat could only be insured for what we paid for it until we got a professional revaluation as the price of boats had shot up. I know at the time several boat owners on here said the insurance company were happy to insure on the basis of what the owner said the value was  but I do wonder how much they would actually pay out. Probably the market value and it will be up to them to say what that is. 

This is most worrying to me in the event that it's written off - I don't know how far 27k will get me now, probably not a lot which is frightening as it was my home. I only got the boat 6 months ago... 

[LadyG]

31 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

In which case you need to get onto your insurance co and pay extra for an "agreed value" insurance policy, because currently they will only pay out whatever you paid for it. 

How would they know what I paid for it?.

It's the same idea for houses, people hike the policy value every year, they don't get paid what they paid for the thing fifty years previously. The policy also covers demolition, and renovation, so more than market value, but again, if you are underinsured you won't get paid the full cost.

Edited August 27, 2023 by LadyG

[MtB]

22 minutes ago, LadyG said:

How would they know what I paid for it?.

 

33 minutes ago, wandering said:

They requested the receipt of sale

 

Q.E.D.

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

Isn't the original purchase price irrelevant? Mine cost seven grand thirty years ago, but surely, for a comprehensive policy it would need to be insured for it's current replacement value and I should be paying for such, not for a policy on a boat worth 7k?

I don't think that would buy me a decent (if old) forty footer these days.

Edited August 27, 2023 by Arthur Marshall

[wandering]

1 minute ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Isn't the original purchase price irrelevant? Mine cost seven grand thirty years ago, but surely, for a comprehensive policy it would need to be insured for it's current replacement value and I should be paying for such, not for a policy on a boat worth 7k?

I don't think that would buy me a decent (if old) forty footer these days.

Isn't the original purchase price irrelevant? Mine cost seven grand thirty years ago, but surely, for a comprehensive policy it would need to be insured for it's current replacement value and I should be paying for such, not for a policy on a boat worth 7k?

I don't think that would buy me a decent (if old) forty footer these days.

The policy states:

 

What is covered:

We will pay for physical loss or damage to Beatrice whilst ashore or afloat, being lifted, hauled out or launched, or in transit by road within the UK (provided by professional road haulier if over 30ft in length).

 

What is not covered:

• Loss or damage due to wear and tear, depreciation, gradual deterioration, or mildew.

• Theft from the interior of Beatrice or place of storage ashore unless following forcible and violent entry, or theft of gear and equipment from the exterior of the boat unless violence and force are used.

• Loss or damage resulting from electrolysis, osmosis or similar conditions.

• Loss or damage due to escape of water from boilers, calorifiers and any other fixed water installation or appliances unless installed and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations, and unless heating and hot water systems are drained if the boat is to be left unattended for periods in excess of 30 days.

• Loss or damage to motors, electrics, batteries and their connections unless directly caused by Beatrice grounding or sinking (provided not due to a cause excluded within this policy), or by fire, contact with an external substance (other than water), malicious damage, theft, sudden accidental incursion of water following an identifiable and unexpected occurrence, dropping off or falling overboard of outboard motors, or by frost (providing all manufacturer’s recommendations have been followed).

• Theft of outboard motors whilst attached to Beatrice or her tender(s) unless securely locked by an anti-theft device which prevents retaining bolts or clamps being undone, and unless you can supply the engine serial number. • Loss of or damage to consumable stores or moorings. • Protective covers more than 3 years old split by the wind or blown away.

• The cost of making good any defect in repair or maintenance, or replacing or renewing any defective part, or making good any fault or error in design or construction.

 

• Claims for loss of use of Beatrice Conditions which apply:

• We will pay the reasonable cost of repair for loss or damage not exceeding £27,000 Reasonable replacement or repair may not result in the appearance and condition being the same as that prior to the claim. In the event of total loss or constructive total loss, we will pay £27,000 or at our option, provide a replacement boat of a similar age, size and type. • In the event of Constructive Total Loss, we will be entitled to retain any salvage.

• We will not pay for unrepaired damage in the event of a subsequent total loss.

• In the event of loss or damage to outboard motors, and only where the serial number is supplied, we will pay the reasonable cost or repair or reinstatement but not exceeding the market value at the time of loss which will be calculated as the new replacement price less a deduction of 10% per year since new, up to a maximum deduction of 70%. • We will pay reasonable costs of inspecting the bottom of your boat after grounding, provided incurred specifically for that purpose, even if no damage is found. • Wewill pay reasonable costs incurred, including salvage, in preventing or minimising a loss covered by this insurance.

[Tacet]

1 hour ago, MtB said:

One of the principles adhered to in the insurance industry is that a claimant must never 'make a profit' out of the insurance policy they hold. Consequently, even if the OP's boat happens to have been worth (say) £50k before it sunk, as s/he has told the ins co they paid £27k for it, this is the maximum they will ever reimburse the OP for the loss of the boat. 

 

 

Gosh.  Must be a bit annoying if you've owned the same house for decades - and only when it burns to a pile of ash do you find the insurers will pay out no more than you gave for it.

[Galoka]

6 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Isn't the original purchase price irrelevant? Mine cost seven grand thirty years ago, but surely, for a comprehensive policy it would need to be insured for it's current replacement value and I should be paying for such, not for a policy on a boat worth 7k?

I don't think that would buy me a decent (if old) forty footer these days.

Yep.

We bought a NB last year, it is  insured it with GJW on thier standard policy,  No where was how much we paid for the boat mentioned. I  was just asked to supply a value I wish the boat to be insured for, and the policy just says they will payout up to that value (which is basically what we paid for it at th emoment)

Clealry I could say anything, but in the event of a large claim I expect them to make an assesment of the current market value of the boat

[magnetman]

@wandering

 

One thing which stuck me is you seem to know what caused the boat to sink. You said it was the weed hatch being loose. 

 

I know this circumstance is a total nightmare and believe me as someone who only has boats to live on it is a horrible thought but do you actually know that this is what happened ? 

 

It just seems like this could be a dodgy situation about insurance and the owner's responsibilities. 

Usually a boat will float with the weed hatch cover off. 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2023 by magnetman
add tag

[Alan de Enfield]

18 minutes ago, wandering said:

We will pay the reasonable cost of repair for loss or damage not exceeding £27,000

 

And that, is the 'bottom line'.

 

They will pay you UP TO £27,000.

But they could determine the market value is (say) £20,000 so you need to be prepared to justify your valuation which as a minimum would include your purchae "Bill Of Sale".

[magnetman]

 

I wonder if this might have been something else like corrosion a the bottom of the rudder post tube.

[haggis]

21 minutes ago, Tacet said:

Gosh.  Must be a bit annoying if you've owned the same house for decades - and only when it burns to a pile of ash do you find the insurers will pay out no more than you gave for it.

I think house insurance is a bit different from boat insurance. We are with Navigation and General and what I said above is what they told me when I asked about increasing the value. Other companies may be different 

Edited August 27, 2023 by haggis

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, magnetman said:

 

I wonder if this might have been something else like corrosion a the bottom of the rudder post tube.

 

I'd suggest that it is not productive to speculate at this time - whatever the reason for the sinking, the loss adjuster will find it and comment on it.

 

If,  it is that the weed hatch was loose (not correctly clamped down) then that'll be in his report.

[MtB]

22 minutes ago, Tacet said:

Gosh.  Must be a bit annoying if you've owned the same house for decades - and only when it burns to a pile of ash do you find the insurers will pay out no more than you gave for it.

 

You clearly haven't read the thread. We are discussing boat insurance.

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

Just now, MtB said:

 

You clearly haven't read the thread. We are discussing boat insurance.

 

 

 

Yes - my house insurance renewal generally states (something to the effect) "The premium is based on the fact we have increased the insured value in line with general house price increases, the increasing cost of demolition, rubble removal and rebuilding costs".

[MtB]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Yes - my house insurance renewal generally states (something to the effect) "The premium is based on the fact we have increased the insured value in line with general house price increases, the increasing cost of demolition, rubble removal and rebuilding costs".

 

Quite. House insurance is on an 'agreed value' basis.

 

 

[ditchcrawler]

1 hour ago, LadyG said:

How would they know what I paid for it?.

It's the same idea for houses, people hike the policy value every year, they don't get paid what they paid for the thing fifty years previously. The policy also covers demolition, and renovation, so more than market value, but again, if you are underinsured you won't get paid the full cost.

They send a loss adjuster round and he looks at your written off boat and decide what it was worth, if its less than you insured it for you get his valuation, if its more than you insured it for you get what you insured it for.

 

[wandering]

25 minutes ago, magnetman said:

@wandering

 

One thing which stuck me is you seem to know what caused the boat to sink. You said it was the weed hatch being loose. 

 

I know this circumstance is a total nightmare and believe me as someone who only has boats to live on it is a horrible thought but do you actually know that this is what happened ? 

 

It just seems like this could be a dodgy situation about insurance and the owner's responsibilities. 

Usually a boat will float with the weed hatch cover off. 

 

 

As I noticed the boat slowly sinking from directly below where I was standing, I managed to pull up next to an island where we (4 men happened to be on the island, thank goodness) opened the engine bay and observed water coming in from the weed hatch.

 

It was closed but didn't appear to be watertight. We tried to tighten it but because of the displacement, it proved impossible. We needed the boat to be higher so we could do that. By the time the man came from Beeston Marina with the pumps to help us, it was a little too late and water began to flow into the engine bay as a result of the starboard list. I don't know 100% for sure this is the problem as I'm not an expert but from observing the water flowing in from the weed hatch, I assume it needs a rubber gasket or something because it wasn't tight enough or watertight. Plus one of the men helping at the time, said that it is coming in from the weed hatch and no where else. 

 

When I left the canal and entered the river, I put the bilge pump on and water would come out (usually this would stop after less than a minute. I noticed after I left the marina until I reached the island, which is 10 minutes more or less, that when I put the pump on, the water wasn't stopping at all. Soon after, I noticed the exhaust fumes interacting with the water indicating I was getting lower. We couldn't see any obvious holes. I think because I was on a canal before where I would move slowly versus the speed of moving on the river sped up introduction of water into the bilge via the weed hatch. Speculation at this time though as I'm not an expert, just an educated guess 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2023 by wandering

[Midnight]

No help to the OP but I originally insured my boat for the costs of the shell and diy fit out. £40,000 This year with crossing the Wash in mind and thinking it's a bit under valued I got a professional valuation £60,000. I rang the insurer, Craftinsure, explained the situation and they agreed to the new value and sent a new policy without asking for the written valuation from the company.

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, wandering said:

I assume it needs a rubber gasket or something because it wasn't tight enough or watertight.

 

 

Yes the weedhatch requires a rubber gasket between the 'body' and the lid, and the lid tightly screwed down onto the gasket.

[MtB]

8 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

They send a loss adjuster round and he looks at your written off boat and decide what it was worth, if its less than you insured it for you get his valuation, if its more than you insured it for you get what you insured it for.

 

 

I doubt that.

 

I think they will declare it 'underinsured' and pay out a proportion of what you insured it for. 

 

Let's say the loss adjuster says (for convenience) it was worth £100k and you have it insured for £50k. AIUI they will say its 50% underinsured so for a constructive total loss they will pay out 50% of the value you insured it for. i.e. £25k.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2023 by MtB
Add a bit.

[ditchcrawler]

1 minute ago, MtB said:

 

I doubt that.

 

I think they will declare it 'underinsured' and pay out a proportion of what you insured it for. 

 

Let's say the loss adjuster says (for convenience) it was worth £100k and you have it insured for £50k. AIUI they will say its 50% underinsured so for a constructive total loss they will pay out 50% of the value you insured it for. 

 

 

 

 

You are probably quite right, they don't like giving money away