Boat Prices

[Laurie Booth]

14 hours ago, Quaysider said:

good luck with "upping the insurance"... I tried   that when I'd finished the fit out and the repy I got was "we'll need an independent valuation (chargeable of course) and THEN found out, because I'd decided not do go down the RCD route (planning on keeping it for 5 years plus) that would prove nigh on impossible... ergo, the best I could do was increase the "contents element"... from the original figure I insured it at...  hmmf

 

Ditto

 

[Jennifer McM]

14 hours ago, Quaysider said:

good luck with "upping the insurance"... I tried   that when I'd finished the fit out and the repy I got was "we'll need an independent valuation (chargeable of course) and THEN found out, because I'd decided not do go down the RCD route (planning on keeping it for 5 years plus) that would prove nigh on impossible... ergo, the best I could do was increase the "contents element"... from the original figure I insured it at...  hmmf

 

We've just 'upped' ours by £5k from last year's insurance without a problem because of work we've had done. Our insurance is with GJW.

 

[Rob-M]

6 hours ago, Jennifer McM said:

We've just 'upped' ours by £5k from last year's insurance without a problem because of work we've had done. Our insurance is with GJW.

 

We were with GJW and they wanted an independent valuation when we asked them about upping the value having had work done. We took our business elsewhere without the need for a valuation.

[Naughty Cal]

13 hours ago, Rob-M said:

We were with GJW and they wanted an independent valuation when we asked them about upping the value having had work done. We took our business elsewhere without the need for a valuation.

Ours has been insured for the same value for the last ten years. It is getting to the stage now where it could probably do with increasing a little.

[alan_fincher]

Whilton's boat sales continue to be bizarre as ever.

I'm quite familiar with this boat, knowing its former owner who used to be mooring warden where we once moored....

https://www.whiltonmarina.co.uk/used-narrowboats/details/3850.aspx

The advert shows as "under offer", but the reality as we boated past yesterday is that it is clearly out on the side, having what looked like a full over-plate.

1990s "Stowe Hill" boat, that many seem to think are quality - but full over-plate already?

Hmm, perhaps "Last hull black and anode check in 2011 has played its part?.

[TheBiscuits]

1 minute ago, alan_fincher said:

The advert shows as "under offer", but the reality as we boated past yesterday is that it is clearly out on the side, having what looked like a full over-plate.

Could it be getting post-survey work done before completing the sale? 

I have no knowledge of this particular boat or sale, but it was the explanation that sprang to mind for the given facts.

[alan_fincher]

1 minute ago, TheBiscuits said:

Could it be getting post-survey work done before completing the sale? 

I have no knowledge of this particular boat or sale, but it was the explanation that sprang to mind for the given facts.

Yes it's possible.  I suspect Whilton own the boat, rather than are brokering it.  Good of them to apparently have originally put a £35K price tag on it, if the hull is shot!

[matty40s]

35 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

Whilton's boat sales continue to be bizarre as ever.

I'm quite familiar with this boat, knowing its former owner who used to be mooring warden where we once moored....

https://www.whiltonmarina.co.uk/used-narrowboats/details/3850.aspx

The advert shows as "under offer", but the reality as we boated past yesterday is that it is clearly out on the side, having what looked like a full over-plate.

1990s "Stowe Hill" boat, that many seem to think are quality - but full over-plate already?

Hmm, perhaps "Last hull black and anode check in 2011 has played its part?.

Most of the Stowe Hills of the 1990s coming to market now are achieving £20k more than that. Hull maintenance is paramount to preserve the longevity and value of your boat, 7 years without blacking for a boat on landline is poor, especially if the previous one was 7 years before that.

Most Stowe Hills of that era do have a design fault in the gas locker which can lead to internal corrosion as well. The integral water tanks front edge sticks 2" out into the gas locker base, due to the low pointy end, the gas locker is quite often wet. This steps welds become a vulnerable corrosion area if not looked after and can lead to canal water in the water tank or canal water down the front edge of the tank into the cabin bilge.

[alan_fincher]

3 hours ago, matty40s said:

7 years without blacking for a boat on landline is poor, especially if the previous one was 7 years before that.

Agreed, but I know that until disposed of (presumably to Whilton) quite recently, the boat has not been on any land-line.  (No mains power at our old moorings).

[matty40s]

We saw Wol last year and the hull was decidly dodgy, it was just after the 1991 SH Badger from Aylesbury that also went for side plating .

[MtB]

On 4/7/2018 at 13:49, Jennifer McM said:

We've just 'upped' ours by £5k from last year's insurance without a problem because of work we've had done. Our insurance is with GJW.

 

 

If you've raised your insured value due to improvement works carried out then fine. But for people 'upping' their insurance because of a general rise in the market values this may well turn out to be a waste of money. In the event of a total loss the insurance usually pays out either market value, or the price paid for the lost asset, whichever is the lower AIUI.

[mrsmelly]

14 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

If you've raised your insured value due to improvement works carried out then fine. But for people 'upping' their insurance because of a general rise in the market values this may well turn out to be a waste of money. In the event of a total loss the insurance usually pays out either market value, or the price paid for the lost asset, whichever is the lower AIUI.

Thats very norty innitt. You should be able to claim its replacement value. For instance my Mother paid £200 pounds for her house but she would get nearer 200k today if it was lost. The purchase price of houses doesnt come into it. If ya paid 45k for a boat 3 years ago that would need 60k to replace it today thats how it should be.

[MoominPapa]

19 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

If you've raised your insured value due to improvement works carried out then fine. But for people 'upping' their insurance because of a general rise in the market values this may well turn out to be a waste of money. In the event of a total loss the insurance usually pays out either market value, or the price paid for the lost asset, whichever is the lower AIUI.

Really? That would be a bit of blow if the house I bought 25 years ago were to be demolished by a rampaging heffalump.

 

MP.

ETA Beaten to it by Mrsmelly. We're starting to agree frequently. He's still wrong about brexit though.

 

Edited April 8, 2018 by MoominPapa

[MtB]

7 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Thats very norty innitt. You should be able to claim its replacement value. For instance my Mother paid £200 pounds for her house but she would get nearer 200k today if it was lost. The purchase price of houses doesnt come into it. If ya paid 45k for a boat 3 years ago that would need 60k to replace it today thats how it should be.

 

House insurance is different. You get paid out the rebuild cost, not the price you paid for it. 

Check with your insurance company if you don't believe me. I'll be pleased to be shown wrong, but I won't be. There is a principle in insurance that a claim paid out should never leave the claimant in a better position than had they not needed to claim. Unless you have 'new for old' insurance, or 'an agreed current marekt value policy. And I bet you don't have either.

[Alan de Enfield]

 

My Boat Insurance Broker offers a choice :

• The Agreed Value policy
• The Market Value policy

The Agreed Value Policy

The Agreed value Policy is a traditional indemnity based contract. Insurers will therefore
place you in the same position as prior to loss. The contract is based on the price paid for
the vessel or a surveyor’s valuation, which becomes the agreed value in the policy.

This type of policy has the benefit that insurers will pay out on this amount and will NOT
make deductions for depreciation, inflation or currency fluctuation except, in some cases
specified in the policy such as wear and tear on machinery and masts, spars and rigging,
outboard engines where a deduction will/can be made. This type of policy suits clients
who wish to know EXACTLY what they will be paid out prior to loss. The only drawback is
that is can be more expensive than other types of cover.

The Market Value Policy

The Market Value policy is an unvalued policy and the value of the boat is not determined
UNTIL loss occurs. An independent surveyor will be appointed by the Insurer to do this
should the need arise. The benefit of this type of policy is that it enables you the boat
owner to take into account depreciation of your boat, and therefore set you own value
for insurance purposes. You could benefit from significant savings in the insurance
premium.
Caution should be noted on setting the market value too low, since, if you under insure
the vessel against its true market value, Insurers will make an adjustment in the
settlement of your claim if the total sum insured is considered inadequate at the time of
loss or damage.

[rusty69]

8 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

House insurance is different. You get paid out the rebuild cost, not the price you paid for it

Yes. I recall trying to work out the size of my house to stick in the BCIS  rebuild calculator many years ago for insurance purposes. 

Edited April 9, 2018 by rusty69

[alan_fincher]

9 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

There is a principle in insurance that a claim paid out should never leave the claimant in a better position than had they not needed to claim.

So, take an example, I paid the going rate of £20K for a second hand boat some years ago, but the purchase price now of a similar boat of thes same age has now risen to £30K, and I now need to claim for a total loss.  If I am insured for £30K, and the insurance company paid in fulll, how am I in a better position than if I had not needed to claim?  The replacement will cost me £30K - I am neither better nor worse off, surely?

[Naughty Cal]

10 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

If you've raised your insured value due to improvement works carried out then fine. But for people 'upping' their insurance because of a general rise in the market values this may well turn out to be a waste of money. In the event of a total loss the insurance usually pays out either market value, or the price paid for the lost asset, whichever is the lower AIUI.

That depends on your policy.

Ours states the market value or the insured value which ever is lowest.

[Parahandy]

On 08/04/2018 at 10:15, alan_fincher said:

Whilton's boat sales continue to be bizarre as ever.

I'm quite familiar with this boat, knowing its former owner who used to be mooring warden where we once moored....

https://www.whiltonmarina.co.uk/used-narrowboats/details/3850.aspx

The advert shows as "under offer", but the reality as we boated past yesterday is that it is clearly out on the side, having what looked like a full over-plate.

1990s "Stowe Hill" boat, that many seem to think are quality - but full over-plate already?

Hmm, perhaps "Last hull black and anode check in 2011 has played its part?.

I remember you Mooring there Sir some years back and of course I remember the Mooring Warden also . I wonder how much longer those Moorings will be with us

as Travis Perkins on the other side of the Fence are Relocating , Canal Side Executive Housing will no doubt follow .

[alan_fincher]

On 08/04/2018 at 10:15, alan_fincher said:

Whilton's boat sales continue to be bizarre as ever.

I'm quite familiar with this boat, knowing its former owner who used to be mooring warden where we once moored....

https://www.whiltonmarina.co.uk/used-narrowboats/details/3850.aspx

The advert shows as "under offer", but the reality as we boated past yesterday is that it is clearly out on the side, having what looked like a full over-plate.

1990s "Stowe Hill" boat, that many seem to think are quality - but full over-plate already?

Hmm, perhaps "Last hull black and anode check in 2011 has played its part?.

 

We passed the boat I referred to here yesterday.

 

I was somewhat surprised to find the overplating done at Whilton only just extends up above waterline at the front ("uphill") end of the boat, and doesn't make it as far as the waterline at the rear of the boat.

 

I would have expected that if it was thin enough below the waterline to need an overplate, that the area around the waterline would also be thin enough to warrant bringing the plating throughout up above it.

 

Is that a duff assumption, or has a crap job been done on this boat?

[Jim Batty]

For the last three years the top boat brokers have been advertising for boats to sell because they can't get enough of them. It's a seller's market.

 

On our travels last year we expressed an interest to a broker in maybe selling our beloved narrowboat to trade upwards,  and they offered a written valuation. Now, we bought our boat right in the doldrums of 2009, when good boats were sitting unsold for months and years, so we were able to get a good discount on it because of that. But just looking at adverts in the press over the last year I could see the real value of our boat was probably higher than we'd paid. But it was a bit surprising that the broker valued it at £10K more than we paid for it. BTW our insurers were happy to readjust our policy accordingly on receipt of the valuation. 

[Parahandy]

3 hours ago, alan_fincher said:

 

We passed the boat I referred to here yesterday.

 

I was somewhat surprised to find the overplating done at Whilton only just extends up above waterline at the front ("uphill") end of the boat, and doesn't make it as far as the waterline at the rear of the boat.

 

I would have expected that if it was thin enough below the waterline to need an overplate, that the area around the waterline would also be thin enough to warrant bringing the plating throughout up above it.

 

Is that a duff assumption, or has a crap job been done on this boat?

I think without the Engineers Survey its difficult to say , the new owner a Bloke in his sixties whom I managed to have a word with , is new to Boating and delighted with his Purchase . Presumably he would have been privy to the Survey assuming of course he commissioned it .

[70liveaboard]

Vulnerable place the hull sides. Should always plate upto and above the waterline (underway waterline), plus a few inches. That is why some good builders offered 8mm hull sides in the late 80's 90's as opposed to thicker base plate. We took the offer up on the semi trad we had built back then, sold later for a lot more than we paid for it new... But that's just silly boat prices when the going is good, of course.

 

That said, 'bottom scratchers' need pay as much attention to the base plate, as the hull sides.

Edited May 16, 2018 by 70liveaboard