Insurance Spot Check

[Naughty Cal]

Your car insurance is posted on a MID so that it can be checked by DVLA and Police so why not something similar for boats it might catch out the uninsured boaters?

 

Peter

I agree.

 

There must surely be a similar system that could be used to log BSC expiry dates, licence status and insurance details for boat owners which would aid CRT and other waterways authorities.

[Sabcat]

I'd be interested to know the total cost of third party claims on the system year by year for the last 2 decades. I'm guessing based on the price of a premium that the figure is minute.

[kevinl]

weed out a few of the boats that put the rest of us at risk by not being insured.

 

 

"At risk" of what, sounds a bit dramatic, has anyone ever been a victim of an uninsured boater and lost out as a result? It seems to be most damage is done to moored boats when the owner is away and no-one ever seems to leave you a note with their insurance details, either that or it's is self inflicted when the boat hits something solid like the bank in which case you can't claim anyway. If I owned a GRP boat then maybe I'd be more concerned about uninsured boats as the scope for them to get damaged is so much higher than steel. I don't know what the claim rate is on boat insurance compared to house or car insurance but I'm willing to bet it's pretty low and is either big claims for sinkings or break in claims. Is it just me or is anyone else getting peed off by the increasing need to "prove" things all the time, I was told I needed to prove my identity before I could do a transaction at the bank by the woman who's lived 3 doors away for the past 20 years because "the computer says so" I might just get a barcode tattooed on my arm so they can scan me

K

[twbm]

DVLA, the Police and the Insurance companies all have bloody great computers that talk to each other so details can be verified live. Setting up a system like that for boats would cost millions. Money that wouldn't be spent on maintenance, costs that would drive the price of insurance up.

Edited July 31, 2014 by twbm

[Naughty Cal]

"At risk" of what, sounds a bit dramatic, has anyone ever been a victim of an uninsured boater and lost out as a result? It seems to be most damage is done to moored boats when the owner is away and no-one ever seems to leave you a note with their insurance details, either that or it's is self inflicted when the boat hits something solid like the bank in which case you can't claim anyway. If I owned a GRP boat then maybe I'd be more concerned about uninsured boats as the scope for them to get damaged is so much higher than steel. I don't know what the claim rate is on boat insurance compared to house or car insurance but I'm willing to bet it's pretty low and is either big claims for sinkings or break in claims. Is it just me or is anyone else getting peed off by the increasing need to "prove" things all the time, I was told I needed to prove my identity before I could do a transaction at the bank by the woman who's lived 3 doors away for the past 20 years because "the computer says so" I might just get a barcode tattooed on my arm so they can scan me

K

Was there not a post on here a while back about a GRP boat causing serious damage to a steel boat resulting in something of an insurance claim?

[kevinl]

Was there not a post on here a while back about a GRP boat causing serious damage to a steel boat resulting in something of an insurance claim?

I forgot when I said "GRP" in my post that the chip on Nasty Cal's shoulder would twitch and another pointless but spirited defence of a perceived criticism of GRP wouldn't be far away.

I said "If I owned a GRP boat then maybe I'd be more concerned about uninsured boats as the scope for them to get damaged is so much higher than steel." because it's a fact. I treat them the same way I treat cyclists when I'm in the car, I give them as much room as possible aware that if I hit them they'll come of worse.

K

[Naughty Cal]

I forgot when I said "GRP" in my post that the chip on Nasty Cal's shoulder would twitch and another pointless but spirited defence of a perceived criticism of GRP wouldn't be far away.

I said "If I owned a GRP boat then maybe I'd be more concerned about uninsured boats as the scope for them to get damaged is so much higher than steel." because it's a fact. I treat them the same way I treat cyclists when I'm in the car, I give them as much room as possible aware that if I hit them they'll come of worse.

K

And I pointed out that it can also be quite the opposite.

 

Why should the owner of a grp boat be any more concerned than any other boat owner?

 

Damage can be caused to any boat, no matter its construction.

 

Steel isnt immune to damage.

[bag 'o' bones]

So what happens if you ignore the e-mail?

What happens if the spam filter eats it?

What happens if the e-mail drops off the end of your list?

What happens if you don't have e-mail access all of the time?

What happens if your e-mail provider 'loses' emails? As were yahoo not so long ago?

 

All a bit heavy handed in my opinion.

 

[Paul C]

So what happens if you ignore the e-mail?

What happens if the spam filter eats it?

What happens if the e-mail drops off the end of your list?

What happens if you don't have e-mail access all of the time?

What happens if your e-mail provider 'loses' emails? As were yahoo not so long ago?

 

All a bit heavy handed in my opinion.

 

 

I don't know, but I can guess that they'd follow up with a letter (posted to the address they hold for you) and phone calls, in some kind of well-thought-out escalation process. And that they would be sure to remind you that having insurance is one of the conditions of having a licence. You'd be a bit of an idiot to stick your head in the sand to the extent of losing your licence simply because of no insurance (having met the other requirements). If you went completely incommunicado they'd probably have some kind of mechanism for the enforcement officer who eventually spots you, to stick a letter on the boat. Just a guess though - be interesting if anyone's had any comeback from not answering/receiving the email. I don't believe for a minute that CRT would simply do nothing - if that was the case they'd not bother even starting the process (they might insist on sight of an insurance certificate at licence renewal instead).

[Wanted]

Well if nothing else this thread has alerted be to the fact that my policy had lapsed a few weeks back! I havent been out in that time but a bit bad of me! all done now

[b0atman]

Ok so has any one else had this request for insurance info ?

[Machpoint005]

Not I.

 

But CRT does ask for your insurance company and policy number at renewal: I imagined they would be able to check, pace Data Protection issues. Not that it would be much help in my case as the annual policy ends a matter of days after the licence application goes in (for prompt payment discount).

[Sabcat]

"At risk" of what, sounds a bit dramatic, has anyone ever been a victim of an uninsured boater and lost out as a result? It seems to be most damage is done to moored boats when the owner is away and no-one ever seems to leave you a note with their insurance details, either that or it's is self inflicted when the boat hits something solid like the bank in which case you can't claim anyway. If I owned a GRP boat then maybe I'd be more concerned about uninsured boats as the scope for them to get damaged is so much higher than steel. I don't know what the claim rate is on boat insurance compared to house or car insurance but I'm willing to bet it's pretty low and is either big claims for sinkings or break in claims. Is it just me or is anyone else getting peed off by the increasing need to "prove" things all the time, I was told I needed to prove my identity before I could do a transaction at the bank by the woman who's lived 3 doors away for the past 20 years because "the computer says so" I might just get a barcode tattooed on my arm so they can scan me

K

 

That's what I was driving at in my post about the total cost of claims on the inland waterways. I think, and I might be wrong here, that a lot of people are just looking for a reason to be personally unhappy about things and justify their moaning.

 

For my part, I insure my boat fully comp as it were (renewal is due on the 27th of next month, £186,45 for £85k cover including contents/personal effects). If another boat caused damage to mine I couldn't give a monkey's whether my insurer can recover the cost from a third party or not.

 

Uninsured boaters, just another item on a long list of things I don't worry a jot about.

[Robbo]

DVLA, the Police and the Insurance companies all have bloody great computers that talk to each other so details can be verified live. Setting up a system like that for boats would cost millions. Money that wouldn't be spent on maintenance, costs that would drive the price of insurance up.

Those connected systems are more than likely be a exported XML file that gets SFTPed from one system to another. It won't cost millions, more like thousands.

[Daiboy]

 

That's what I was driving at in my post about the total cost of claims on the inland waterways. I think, and I might be wrong here, that a lot of people are just looking for a reason to be personally unhappy about things and justify their moaning.

 

For my part, I insure my boat fully comp as it were (renewal is due on the 27th of next month, £186,45 for £85k cover including contents/personal effects). If another boat caused damage to mine I couldn't give a monkey's whether my insurer can recover the cost from a third party or not.

 

Uninsured boaters, just another item on a long list of things I don't worry a jot about.

 

Blinking hell Sabcat that's pretty reasonable. I have just paid mine; £237.50 for £35k cover for fully comp, contents, bike, generator etc. and this includes a £75 discount for NCB. I am with Collidge & Pts. Could I ask your insurer for next year?

 

Daiboy

[Naughty Cal]

 

Blinking hell Sabcat that's pretty reasonable. I have just paid mine; £237.50 for £35k cover for fully comp, contents, bike, generator etc. and this includes a £75 discount for NCB. I am with Collidge & Pts. Could I ask your insurer for next year?

 

Daiboy

It does pay to shop around.

 

We insure through a group deal (Sealine Forum) through Velos brokers. The policy is held with Allianz and is a full coastal policy with fully comp insurance with a total insured value of £50k. Cost of the policy is £180.

[Sabcat]

 

Blinking hell Sabcat that's pretty reasonable. I have just paid mine; £237.50 for £35k cover for fully comp, contents, bike, generator etc. and this includes a £75 discount for NCB. I am with Collidge & Pts. Could I ask your insurer for next year?

 

Daiboy

 

We're with Nautical Insurance services, from Leigh on Sea in Essex and it's insured as a permanent residence and we've got 10+ years no claims (I think in effect this tops out at 5 years for the purposes of a discount).

[kevinl]

 

We're with Nautical Insurance services, from Leigh on Sea in Essex and it's insured as a permanent residence and we've got 10+ years no claims (I think in effect this tops out at 5 years for the purposes of a discount).

I'm with them too as they will insure an older boat without a survey, I've no idea if they're any good as I've never made a claim, that's when you find out as these people found out, their entire claim rejected because they were under insured.

K

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/experts/article-2709411/esure-won-t-pay-30-000-belongings-burgled-home-rising-gold-prices-meant-stolen-jewellery-worth-I-thought.html

[cheshire~rose]

Craftinsure send a pdf copy of the new policy, including an insurance certificate, with the email renewal every year. Download this and you have the ability to produce as many copies as you need without having to go on line agan.

The DVLC have statutory rights to insurance information, avoiding data protection problems. CRT might like to convince our legislators that it would be in the public interest to give them this power? the alternative would be for them to get all insurers to get waivers of data protection from policyholders.

 

Yes that is an extremely good point and if I had arranged the insurance then I suspect I would have been able to go to the relevant file on my PC and find the file. Sadly it was t'other half that arranges the insurance and he will have the email..... somewhere..it is usually easier for him to go to the website and find the info.

 

That is why he says I am his secretary but this is one thing he has not (yet) handed over to me to deal with

[Sabcat]

I'm with them too as they will insure an older boat without a survey, I've no idea if they're any good as I've never made a claim, that's when you find out as these people found out, their entire claim rejected because they were under insured.

K

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/experts/article-2709411/esure-won-t-pay-30-000-belongings-burgled-home-rising-gold-prices-meant-stolen-jewellery-worth-I-thought.html

 

Not uncommon although the refusal of the whole claim and the cancelling of the policy is a little extreme - in my experience (I worked in claims albeit commercial) I'd expect an insurer to say "the total value of contents is x you insured for Y which is only 40% of X so we're only paying 40% of the value of the items making up the claim."

 

I guess with home buildings and contents the market is so fierce and margins so low that insurers don't feel they have room to move. Take buying your insurance seriously, if you care about what you're insuring. I'm not under insured, I didn't buy the policy based on price either. I got the cover I wanted from a broker that understands exactly what I want and supplied me with an appropriate policy in this case from Zurich Group. I'd have insurance whether CRT/moorings owner wanted me to or not.

[bag 'o' bones]

 

I don't know, but I can guess that they'd follow up with a letter (posted to the address they hold for you) and phone calls, in some kind of well-thought-out escalation process. And that they would be sure to remind you that having insurance is one of the conditions of having a licence. You'd be a bit of an idiot to stick your head in the sand to the extent of losing your licence simply because of no insurance (having met the other requirements). If you went completely incommunicado they'd probably have some kind of mechanism for the enforcement officer who eventually spots you, to stick a letter on the boat. Just a guess though - be interesting if anyone's had any comeback from not answering/receiving the email. I don't believe for a minute that CRT would simply do nothing - if that was the case they'd not bother even starting the process (they might insist on sight of an insurance certificate at licence renewal instead).

 

The thing is its not a case of trying to be being awkward or anything like that its the cack handed way that CRT is approaching the whole thing.

 

 

The way the somewhat officious e-mail is worded, suggests that in accordance with Terms and Conditions of the licence the onus is on you to provide a copy of your insurance details on demand. The truth is the Terms and Conditions say nothing of the sort, other than:

 

"When applying for your licence, you are asked to declare the following details of your boat’s insurance:

•Name of insurance provider

•Policy number

•Expiry date of the policy"

 

According to the e-mail: "We no longer ask you to provide a copy of your insurance certificate when you renew your licence"

Well of course not, you don't actually need a certificate to 'prove' that you have insurance. One phone call to the insurance company that you have provided, quoting the policy number; and your insurance company can furnish CRT with all the information they require - which of course you agreed to share as part of your original licence application:

 

: quote: ' 5.3. You agree that we may contact your insurance provider to check the validity of your policy, and that the insurance provider may give us such information as we may reasonably require".

 

As for the line in the e-mail "Failure to respond may result in your licence being terminated" what grounds does CRT believe that they can carry out such a threat?

[cheshire~rose]

I

 

 

The thing is its not a case of trying to be being awkward or anything like that its the cack handed way that CRT is approaching the whole thing.

 

 

 

I do see it as being awkward.

 

CRT ask a perfectly reasonable question. It is a simple enough job to give the answer they require so why not just do it?

 

Why does anyone feel the need to pull their methods to bits when none of us really has a full understanding of how their system works? In an ideal world there would be a system set up like the police and DVLA have but lets remember that system has not been in place all that many years.

 

It is a little bit like when a policeman asks you "Is this your car sir" you can answer yes (or no) or you can ask why they want to know or tell them it is none of their business. It really won't get you very far not earn you many brownie points for good behaviour.

 

Perhaps we could have all boats bar coded with APNR cameras set up along the canal at regular intervals to clock your movements. No thank you. If CRT want us to send them some details I for one am very happy to comply and try and make their job a little easier

[Alan de Enfield]

bag 'o' bones, on 31 Jul 2014 - 1:48 PM, said:

So what happens if you ignore the e-mail?

What happens if the spam filter eats it?

What happens if the e-mail drops off the end of your list?

What happens if you don't have e-mail access all of the time?

What happens if your e-mail provider 'loses' emails? As were yahoo not so long ago?

 

All a bit heavy handed in my opinion.

 

 

I was selected at random last year - I sent a reply, by email with a pdf copy of my policy attached, within about 2 minutes of receipt of the 'request'.

 

About a week, or so, later I received an email 'reminder' that I had not replied and they were still awaiting a copy of my certificate.

 

I replied giving them the date & time they had received the mail and the date & time the mail was read - I never heard anything from them again (not that I expected an apology - it is C&RT we are talking about)

Edited July 31, 2014 by Alan de Enfield

[Guest]

The thing is its not a case of trying to be being awkward or anything like that its the cack handed way that CRT is approaching the whole thing.

 

 

The way the somewhat officious e-mail is worded, suggests that in accordance with Terms and Conditions of the licence the onus is on you to provide a copy of your insurance details on demand. The truth is the Terms and Conditions say nothing of the sort, other than:

 

"When applying for your licence, you are asked to declare the following details of your boat’s insurance:

•Name of insurance provider

•Policy number

•Expiry date of the policy"

 

According to the e-mail: "We no longer ask you to provide a copy of your insurance certificate when you renew your licence"

Well of course not, you don't actually need a certificate to 'prove' that you have insurance. One phone call to the insurance company that you have provided, quoting the policy number; and your insurance company can furnish CRT with all the information they require - which of course you agreed to share as part of your original licence application:

 

: quote: ' 5.3. You agree that we may contact your insurance provider to check the validity of your policy, and that the insurance provider may give us such information as we may reasonably require".

 

As for the line in the e-mail "Failure to respond may result in your licence being terminated" what grounds does CRT believe that they can carry out such a threat?

If you are insured what is your problem?

[cheshire~rose]

 

I was selected at random last year - I sent a reply, by email with a pdf copy of my policy attached, within about 2 minutes of receipt of the 'request'.

 

About a week, or so, later I received an email 'reminder' that I had not replied and they were still awaiting a copy of my certificate.

 

I replied giving them the date & time they had received the mail and the date & time the mail was read - I never heard anything from them again (not that I expected an apology - it is C&RT we are talking about)

 

Dave got confirmation they had recieved it from them