Insurance on amber falling

[Cal Ando]

I seem to be having a war of semantics with my insurance company.  Does anyone know of an insurance company that definitely allows navigation on yellow river warnings.

We are moving our NB from Newbury to winter it in Kinver,  via oxford/GU/Stratford/Avon.Severn/Staff & Worc.  This because we are fed up with waiting until mid May until the Kennet subsides!   We moored on green boards on the Severn at Worcester, realised we needed fuel, hopped up the W&B to get fuel and lingered on the canal for a day, Severn then went into flood on yellow rising, stayed there for unpteen days.  The official, concrete visitor mooring we were on disappeared under 4 ft of flood water.   Even when river went into yellow falling, it seemed too risky with imminent rain to risk passage to Stourport.   I estimated the flow to be at least 2mph and as we were doing 4mph up it from Tewkesbury when it was green, we might have taken 7 hrs to transit from Diglis to Stourport and might not have got to Lincomb lock before it closed at 4pm daily.      We wimped out and went via W&B, Gas street, Netherton, Stourbridge.  

So I asked my insurers 'if we HAD TO, could we navigate on yellow falling'.   They said 'no' and provided the following:

Underwriters have confirmed that if you were to navigate into a red or amber board condition location or moor up in a red or amber board condition location then our policy would not cover you

So what this statement suggests is, if you are minding your own business (say on the Thames, in the summer, on a green status) and moor on a field, and the river goes into amber and you realise you need to get off that field,  you are not insured to move to a safer location as you would be either 'navigating into an amber board condition' or 'mooring up in an amber board condition location'.   I have asked specifically 'what happens if you need to move to a safer location' (as we would have HAD to have done if we'd stayed on the Severn), but only received this reply.   

As usual, insurers are so wrapped up in quelling their own interpretation of risk that they fail to see either other possibilities or scenarios, or common sense.

When we first got our boat, we (unwittingly) navigated the Thames on yellow boards.   As I've lived on the Thames most of my life I knew what the river could do,what my boat could do and what it and my limitations were..   Our passage was eventful but safe

If anyone knows of an insurance company that is happy for navigation on yellow boards, please let me know.

[nicknorman]

The general rule with insurance companies is to read the policy carefully and don’t ask about any issues that are not mentioned. No doubt your policy terms DO NOT say “if you are moored, and the river goes onto red boards sometime later, you aren’t covered”. When any underwriter is asked a specific question, the answer will always be so as to minimise their exposure to risk.

 

However now that you have asked the question and received that answer, your position is weak. My advice would be to change insurance companies for one of the other mainstream companies, read the policy carefully, comply with any terms, but don’t ask questions about specific circumstances that aren’t excluded in the policy terms.

 

Clearly the response you received is unreasonable, but the hassle involved in challenging that isn’t worth it. Just change insurance companies.

 

We are with Craftinsure. I just checked the policy wording. The relevant exclusion clause is this:

 

“Wilful misconduct or acts of recklessness by you, or those to whom this policy extends…”

 

I suppose recklessness could include setting off on red boards, but not on yellow boards nor mooring on red boards nor getting caught out when conditions unexpectedly deteriorate to red boards whilst you are en route.

 

Edited October 20, 2023 by nicknorman

[dmr]

9 hours ago, nicknorman said:

The general rule with insurance companies is to read the policy carefully and don’t ask about any issues that are not mentioned. No doubt your policy terms DO NOT say “if you are moored, and the river goes onto red boards sometime later, you aren’t covered”. When any underwriter is asked a specific question, the answer will always be so as to minimise their exposure to risk.

 

However now that you have asked the question and received that answer, your position is weak. My advice would be to change insurance companies for one of the other mainstream companies, read the policy carefully, comply with any terms, but don’t ask questions about specific circumstances that aren’t excluded in the policy terms.

 

Clearly the response you received is unreasonable, but the hassle involved in challenging that isn’t worth it. Just change insurance companies.

 

We are with Craftinsure. I just checked the policy wording. The relevant exclusion clause is this:

 

“Wilful misconduct or acts of recklessness by you, or those to whom this policy extends…”

 

I suppose recklessness could include setting off on red boards, but not on yellow boards nor mooring on red boards nor getting caught out when conditions unexpectedly deteriorate to red boards whilst you are en route.

 

 

But even red boards might not be reckless if you know the river, know your boat, and judge that a short run on reds to get to a safe place is better than sticking around while the conditions get worse. Going on to a river on reds would likely be reckless.

 

I did once get a "sensible" response from an insurance company (regarding towing) but in general you are correct, if you ask the answer is no.

I did speak to an insurance man who said that underwriters have become very conservative (jittery) of late due to the prospect of losing money

[Cheese]

12 hours ago, Cal Ando said:

...So I asked my insurers 'if we HAD TO, could we navigate on yellow falling'.   They said 'no' and provided the following:

Underwriters have confirmed that if you were to navigate into a red or amber board condition location or moor up in a red or amber board condition location then our policy would not cover you ...

Even though they said this I am not sure they would be able to sustain it if you had to make a claim. Insurer terms are required to be reasonable, and can be appealed if they put unreasonable interpretations on them. If your actions are sensible, such as mooring up in a safe way when a river suddenly goes into amber/red, or moving off a river in amber to a safer canal, you would have a strong case if they tried to decline a claim. If you leave your boat moored unattended for a week with non-rising lines on a river, and then floods cause it to sink, they can reasonably decline!

[harrybsmith]

Haven Knox- Johnson seemed pretty reasonable about this sort of thing, I had a very good read of my policy after a near miss on the Soar a few years ago (was absent from the boat for Christmas, moored on a canalised section, river levels rose rapidly, boat next door sunk due to ropes too tight, I just got away with it, lesson learned!) 

[matty40s]

1 hour ago, harrybsmith said:

Haven Knox- Johnson seemed pretty reasonable about this sort of thing, I had a very good read of my policy after a near miss on the Soar a few years ago (was absent from the boat for Christmas, moored on a canalised section, river levels rose rapidly, boat next door sunk due to ropes too tight, I just got away with it, lesson learned!) 

Above Barrow Deep, or Birstall??

I have saved more than a few boats there when moored in the area!! 

[harrybsmith]

1 hour ago, matty40s said:

Above Barrow Deep, or Birstall??

I have saved more than a few boats there when moored in the area!! 

 

Barrow Deep on the CRT winter mooring, we spoke at the time (still very grateful for you alerting me to it), I believe you may have been part of moving the sunken boat to Sileby Mill? 2017/18 would make sense. 

 

Mine was the yellow and orange Highbridge cruiser

[Cal Ando]

Thanks for all your replies so far.   Interestingly, we are with this insurance company because the were so reasonable!   Years ago, the Thames rose and dropped rapidly and the gunwale of my father's boat caught on the landing stage and sank, they paid up like little lambs!   

Mrs Ando also said not to fight them further until a claim is in dispute, which hopefully will be never.   Unfortunately I am an auditor and have a Sheldon Cooper style of needing to ensure that every base is covered!

 

PS  How does Gordon Ramsey know it's safe to go back in the kitchen?

A:   He does a whisk assessment 😂

 

[blackrose]

23 hours ago, dmr said:

But even red boards might not be reckless if you know the river, know your boat, and judge that a short run on reds to get to a safe place is better than sticking around while the conditions get worse. Going on to a river on reds would likely be reckless.

 

I once navigated the Thames on reds and yellows all the way from Laleham to Reading taking advice from lockkeepers as I went. The reds weren't bad reds. I'm with Craftinsure so whether I was insured or not I've no idea. I'd been working for a Thames passenger boat company for a couple of years prior to that so moving in slightly adverse conditions seemed normal to me at the time. Some parts were a bit hairy such as going through those bridges near Sonning and approaching a couple of locks with weird running next to them, but it was fun.

 

My thinking is if you move on yellows and reds just make sure nothing happens that's going to require insurance! 😋

Edited October 22, 2023 by blackrose

[Tonka]

2 hours ago, blackrose said:

 

I once navigated the Thames on reds and yellows all the way from Laleham to Reading taking advice from lockkeepers as I went. The reds weren't bad reds. I'm with Craftinsure so whether I was insured or not I've no idea. I'd been working for a Thames passenger boat company for a couple of years prior to that so moving in slightly adverse conditions seemed normal to me at the time. Some parts were a bit hairy such as going through those bridges near Sonning and approaching a couple of locks with weird running next to them, but it was fun.

 

My thinking is if you move on yellows and reds just make sure nothing happens that's going to require insurance! 😋

You are only one plastic bag, one rope or one log in the prop away from disaster. 

Best to just stay moored

[magnetman]

The other thing people might not necessarily think of is that a swollen river will by definition have more debris in it thus increasing the risk of prop fouls. 

 

I often take the launch out on the River in red boards and have done a fair bit of red board boating in various heavy boats where a prop foul would be serious. Never had any problems but don't really like it. 

 

The launch has an outboard which is easily dealt with due to the design of the craft. 

Well designed for the River. Made in Eton. 

 

One can walk around the outboard and stand on the back deck it barely moves. Rowing coach launch designed to be able to be used as a lifeboat. 

[Scholar Gypsy]

I was going to quote my Craftinsure policy but @nicknorman  beat me to it. I guess the problem the insurers have is that they have literally no idea how competent a particular skipper is - as we don't need any licence etc.  The craftinsure underwriters were sensible when I did a Wash crossing a few years ago, ie a list of extra conditions which suggested to me someone who understood what the risks were on this trip, and what mitigations were sensible and possible. 

It's worth noting that on some rivers - the Nene is a good example - the whole river goes on red even when the problem is fairly localised (or as with the recent storms, as a precautionary measure before the significant rainfall has actually happened). If you know the river then moving in those conditions is not reckless (I would argue). The EA are working on this, but it's not a straightforward issue.

[Dave123]

On 25/10/2023 at 10:13, Scholar Gypsy said:

I was going to quote my Craftinsure policy but @nicknorman  beat me to it. I guess the problem the insurers have is that they have literally no idea how competent a particular skipper is - as we don't need any licence etc.  The craftinsure underwriters were sensible when I did a Wash crossing a few years ago, ie a list of extra conditions which suggested to me someone who understood what the risks were on this trip, and what mitigations were sensible and possible. 

It's worth noting that on some rivers - the Nene is a good example - the whole river goes on red even when the problem is fairly localised (or as with the recent storms, as a precautionary measure before the significant rainfall has actually happened). If you know the river then moving in those conditions is not reckless (I would argue). The EA are working on this, but it's not a straightforward issue.

The Kennet river sections are another example of a navigation that has very unspecific information about the location of red boards. The CRT strong stream website usually gives information just for county lock, Woolhampton swing bridge and occasionally Newbury town bridge/lock. The CRT email/stoppage notices however, are given as blanket red board notices for entire stretches, eg from Guyers lock to County lock and sometimes even as far as Kintbury, even though there are many entirely canal sections within this stretch.

[enigmatic]

On 22/10/2023 at 07:20, blackrose said:

I once navigated the Thames on reds and yellows all the way from Laleham to Reading taking advice from lockkeepers as I went. The reds weren't bad reds. I'm with Craftinsure so whether I was insured or not I've no idea. I'd been working for a Thames passenger boat company for a couple of years prior to that so moving in slightly adverse conditions seemed normal to me at the time. Some parts were a bit hairy such as going through those bridges near Sonning and approaching a couple of locks with weird running next to them, but it was fun.

 

My thinking is if you move on yellows and reds just make sure nothing happens that's going to require insurance! 😋

I once navigated part of the Thames on reds simply because the EA's online info was wrong. Upstream passage past islands was slow at full throttle and seeing the red boards when I got to the lock wasn't a surprise! I found the Thames okay on yellows (anchoring in the middle when my drive plate failed wasn't fun, but the anchor held!), but really didn't fancy Marlow on red...

 

The other thing to be aware of about travelling on red boards is that sometimes locks are actually physically locked or electronics switched off. Sometimes, for very obvious and sensible reasons, sometimes as a precautionary measure and/or because staff are jobsworths. Great Ouse has been shut since Storm Babbet. That included several days of beautiful cruising conditions with relatively normal water levels (I wouldn't choose to navigate it now the second storm hit), and a small army of EA staff calmly opening and closing a lock to test its functionality without even letting the boat stuck on the lock landing below through before the next storm...

 

[Dave123]

Does anyone known how the levels at which red boards are displayed were originally calculated? I know for the Thames it is to do with the % of weir gates that are open, but on CRT navigations with fixed weirs, like the Cherwell stretch, or the trent at Alrewas, or the Kennet or Soar, it's just based on the river height? Did someone actually try and work out what flow of water was too much for an average narrowboat to push against? I imagine the concept of red boards was brought in during the early days of the leisure industry, or was it in place during the working years of canals? Wondering as it seems to vary a lot from river to river...eg the Kennet can be trickier in "green" than other rivers are in yellow or even red...