Third party insurance

[Cheshire cat]

This is a question for the people on here who have third party insurance.

 

Does your policy cover the costs of refloating in the event that your boat sinks?

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, Cheshire cat said:

This is a question for the people on here who have third party insurance.

 

Does your policy cover the costs of refloating in the event that your boat sinks?

 

It varies by provider, some do, some don't and with some it can be 'added' for an additional fee.

 

Craftinsure (3rd party policy) covers : "Recovery of the vessel following a loss" 

 

Bishop Skinner say "Up to £15,000 costs for removal of wreck where it's your legal liability to do so"

 

Basic boat insurance state : "Wreck Removal We will provide indemnity against any third party claim not otherwise insured under this Policy for which the Insured Person shall by reason of interest in the Insured Craft become legally liable to pay in respect of the cost of any attempted or actual raising removal or destruction of the wreck of the Insured Craft or any neglect or failure to raise remove or destroy the same arising out of accident occurring within the Geographical Limits during the Period of Insurance and caused by or arising from the ownership or use of the Insured Craft by the Insured Person.

 

But they do not pay out "where the Insured Craft is not in sound condition and the claim directly relates to the condition of the Insured Craft."

 

Edited July 15 by Alan de Enfield

[David Mack]

53 minutes ago, Cheshire cat said:

 

Does your policy cover the costs of refloating in the event that your boat sinks?

The examples quoted cover the costs incurred by a navigation authority or similar in the removal (and possible scrapping) of your boat if it is causing an obstruction or environmental damage. That it not necessarily the same as the costs you would incur hiring a contractor to refloat your boat and clean and repair it to bring it back into use.

[magnetman]

^ Good point. 

 

Basic Boat Liability does have wreck removal but as you suggest this is for the use of a third party ie navigation authority or riparian owner not the vessel owner. 

 

If it was for the vessel owner it would be too easy to scam it by insuring a junk Boat then letting it sink then employing your mate to salvage it and bill the insurance company. 

 

 

[MtB]

28 minutes ago, David Mack said:

That it not necessarily the same as the costs you would incur hiring a contractor to refloat your boat and clean and repair it to bring it back into use.

 

Indeed. 

 

Surely this is implied in the term "third party" insurance. Your losses and expenses are not covered, only losses and expenses your boat causes to others, i.e. third parties. 

 

If the OP wants to insure against their own losses, then comprehensive insurance is the product to choose.

 

If the OP is happy to 'self-insure' and only needs an insurance certificate in order to qualify for a licence, then the cheapest TP is all that is needed. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 15 by MtB

[magnetman]

It would be interesting to know what the OP @Cheshire cat meant. 

 

Did they mean 'will I get my Boat floated for free if it sinks' or did they mean 'will I get a bill if it sinks'. 

 

One idly wonders how the ownership works if someone else pays to have the vessel floated. Presumably the insurance company have some sort of claim so if it was raised and the owner wanted it back they would need to pay the costs. 

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, MtB said:

 

Indeed. 

 

Surely this is implied in the term "third party" insurance. Your losses and expenses are not covered, only losses and expenses your boat causes to others. 

 

 

 

 

 

And, if it sinks because you have not had the 'pin-holes' in the hull welded up, or your hull fitting are corroded and fall off, your insurance will not pay out (to anyone) and you could be left with a huge personal liability.

[MtB]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

And, if it sinks because you have not had the 'pin-holes' in the hull welded up, or your hull fitting are corroded and fall off, your insurance will not pay out (to anyone) and you could be left with a huge personal liability.

 

Indeed. And the insurer needs to 'take a view' on how probable this is, and how it might affect their personal finances should that occur. 

 

This takes one straight to the root of why we might want or need insurance!

 

 

 

 

 

P.S. My oen view is a pin hole is not going to sink my boat. The bilge pump will cope with that just fine. Hull fittings falling off won't sink it either, unless I stupidly have them under the waterline!

 

 

 

 

[magnetman]

But how would the insurance company know the Boat had sunk through neglect? They would need to get it out and do a survey. 

 

 

[Lily Rose]

4 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

And, if it sinks because you have not had the 'pin-holes' in the hull welded up, or your hull fitting are corroded and fall off, your insurance will not pay out (to anyone) and you could be left with a huge personal liability.

 

Might that not also be the case with fully comp as well?

 

Presumably there will be something in the small print about maintenance, neglect etc.

 

[magnetman]

4 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Indeed. And the insurer needs to 'take a view' on how probable this is,  

 

insured

Edited July 15 by magnetman

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, MtB said:

 

Indeed. And the insurer needs to 'take a view' on how probable this is, and how it might affect their personal finances should that occur. 

 

This takes one straight to the root of why we might want or need insurance!

 

 

 

 

Would it be  reasonable to suggest that most of the 'cheap, doer uppers' that are bought and insured 3rd party only, are the ones most likely to suffer from

1) a higher risk of sinking

2) poor maintenance

[Lily Rose]

Just now, magnetman said:

But how would the insurance company know the Boat had sunk through neglect? They would need to get it out and do a survey. 

 

 

 

They might consider it's worth doing that if it could get them out of being liable for a huge bill.

 

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, Lily Rose said:

 

Might that not also be the case with fully comp as well?

 

Presumably there will be something in the small print about maintenance, neglect etc.

 

 

Certainly in my fully comp policies it states the vessel must be maintained in a 'sea-worthy' condition.

[magnetman]

 

Just now, Lily Rose said:

 

They might consider it's worth doing that if it could get them out of being liable for a huge bill.

 

Yes. Then bill the vessel owner later. 

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Certainly in my fully comp policies it states the vessel must be maintained in a 'sea-worthy' condition.

I hope it does not say this for narrowboat policies. Or is it not meant to be taken literally. 

 

Piece of plywood over the well deck?

[MtB]

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Would it be  reasonable to suggest that most of the 'cheap, doer uppers' that are bought and insured 3rd party only, are the ones most likely to suffer from

1) a higher risk of sinking

2) poor maintenance

 

 

Yes definitely. This is probably why my own TP insurance policies are so damned expensive at several tens of quid!! 

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

16 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I hope it does not say this for narrowboat policies. Or is it not meant to be taken literally. 

 

Do you have insurance ?

 

The craftinsure policies for Narrowboats (non-tidal waters) states :

 

(yes I know No3 is missing - complain to craft insure not me)

 

General Conditions

These are the conditions of the insurance You will need to meet as part of this contract. If You do not a claim may be rejected or payment could be reduced. In some circumstances Your policy will be invalid.

1. The Boat is constructed of fibreglass, aluminium or steel

2. The permanent home mooring of the Boat is in the United Kingdom.

4. You shall maintain the Boat in a proper state of repair and Seaworthiness, and in the case of trailers, roadworthiness, and will exercise due care and diligence in safeguarding Your Boat and property.

5. You possess a current Canal & River Trust or Environment Agency Licence, or the equivalent Licence from the local Navigation Authority as appropriate, and a current Boat Safety Certificate.

6. If the Boat is over 30 years old and over 25ft in length, You have in Your possession a survey report not more than 5 years old from a qualified surveyor, with all recommendations complied with (or a survey carried out within the past 7 years if the Boat is already insured by You with Craftinsure).

8. The Boat is not a static houseboat.

10. The insured Boat has not been modified in a way that affects its Seaworthiness

[Tony Brooks]

This properly maintained bit - I am not sure how easy it would be for an insurance company to use that in all cases. Example, I shared a pontoon at Calcutt with a fairly aged Reverend gentleman and on one visit I noticed that his boat was sinking, so I told the office whereupon the salvage pumps came out, it was refloated and pulled up the slipway. It transpired that he had not been down since having it blacked, and (presumably) the pressure washing had perforated a pit or pits in the hull in one very local area. As I see it, he was maintaining the boat. I suppose Calcutt could have been sued for negligence or something, but surely the man on the Clapham omnibus would conclude the Rev was maintaining his boat if it came to court.

 

Luckily, it did not seem too much damage was done.

 

This is why whenever I had the boat blacked, I asked for a visual hull and anode inspection report in writing, but only ever got it verbally. 

[Cheshire cat]

Thanks for your replies. 

 

Scenario is that I am a member of a boat club. We are concerned as to what might transpire if we have a member whose boat sinks. Some of the members are insured third party.

 

My boat is insured with Craftinsure and is covered for salvage but as in Alan's example it does say in the policy that I have to maintain my boat.

I am happy that I am taking the necessary care but the concern is that it might be possible that someone has not maintained their boat sufficiently well and it takes on water and sinks. It would be good to know that third party recovery costs would be covered but from everyone's input it seems like that will not be the case. 

 

The owner might not be able to afford to refloat it themselves and if that is the case it's probably going to be a waste of time trying to sue them. Meanwhile, we are stuck with a wreck on our moorings. 

 

I hasten to add that this scenario hasn't played out yet but it is a concern for the club committee which is why I asked the question.

[Lady M]

Do your boat club rules require insurance that covers wreck removal?  At my boat club, this is the situation and members are also required to maintain their boats in cruising condition.

[magnetman]

54 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Do you have insurance ?

 

I have 3rd party only. 

 

I do realise what 'seaworthy' means and was being facetious. 

 

[David Mack]

2 hours ago, Cheshire cat said:

Scenario is that I am a member of a boat club. We are concerned as to what might transpire if we have a member whose boat sinks. Some of the members are insured third party.

The club would be a Third Party under the owners insurance, so should be able to claim costs reasonably incurred in removing the wreck.

[Cheshire cat]

2 hours ago, Lady M said:

Do your boat club rules require insurance that covers wreck removal?  At my boat club, this is the situation and members are also required to maintain their boats in cruising condition.

Yes but cruising condition is subjective. That is the problem. You might think it is in cruising condition but if it doesn't come out of the water regularly who is to say other than the insurance company when you try to make a claim

[Arthur Marshall]

Basic Boat say they have paid out in the past to refloat boats. They don't specify why they sank though. I may ask at next renewal time - my assumption has been that if it got caught in a lock it would qualify but not if it just rusted through for lack of attention. Be nice to know properly.

[Alan de Enfield]

19 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Basic Boat say they have paid out in the past to refloat boats. They don't specify why they sank though. I may ask at next renewal time - my assumption has been that if it got caught in a lock it would qualify but not if it just rusted through for lack of attention. Be nice to know properly.

 

I quoted the Basic Boat 3rd party insurance conditions above (post number ??) - and - yes they will pay for the boat recovery as long as the claim is not in response to something caused by lack of maintenance (blacking, gland packing, leaky bottom, hull fitting corroding away etc etc.

 

 

Basic boat insurance state : "Wreck Removal We will provide indemnity against any third party claim not otherwise insured under this Policy for which the Insured Person shall by reason of interest in the Insured Craft become legally liable to pay in respect of the cost of any attempted or actual raising removal or destruction of the wreck of the Insured Craft or any neglect or failure to raise remove or destroy the same arising out of accident occurring within the Geographical Limits during the Period of Insurance and caused by or arising from the ownership or use of the Insured Craft by the Insured Person.

 

But they do not pay out "where the Insured Craft is not in sound condition and the claim directly relates to the condition of the Insured Craft."