Head on collision

[Shrew]

Originally Posted by svtickles

I'm curious what the insurance will cover...
Since the boat needs to go on the dry, will they pay for hotel accommodation?

Were you listed as a 'liveaboard' on the policy? I doubt they will pay for hotel accomodations.

Originally Posted by svtickles

Car rental?

My vehicle policy specifically lists car rental. My marine insurance policy for the boat does not. If it's not listed, it's not provided.

Originally Posted by svtickles

New flights? (We have crew who were supposed to leave in another country we probably won't reach in time).

I would highly doubt they would pay for repatriation, relocation or general travel. This is not defined in either my homeowners, vehicle or marine policies.

Originally Posted by svtickles

What has other people's experience been when they lost their "summer home"? (i.e. the boat)

Insurance should pay to repair, unless the repair exceeds the agreed hull value of the boat. Then I'd expect them to give me the agreed upon value. I wouldn't expect them to cover contents, since it is unlikely that the equipment and personal effects were damaged.


I'd stop relying so much on AIS.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

. . . Mostly, with collisions, responsibility is apportioned, and I am guessing (not being in the EU and not knowing what your policy will cover) that what will happen is that the other guy will wind up bearing a good deal of it. If he was motoring, did he have his cone up? Also, that puts you as the starboard boat for him, and he should have not stood on, but turned so as to avoid you; so maybe he was not keeping watch either? . . .

Who was stand-on and who was give-way, prior to the collision being not avoidable by the action of the give-way vessel alone, is not of great importance in the final apportionment of liability, which will be something around 50/50 in this, I think. And cone is not required if sails were not up.


I feel terrible for the OP -- there but for the grace of God go all of us. Something like this is my nightmare.


It's a lesson to all of us to keep a proper watch by sight and by hearing AT ALL TIMES, as the Rules require. Not assume the sea is empty even if you haven't seen another vessel in days.


Not rely on AIS alone.


Ships run their radars from before slipping their lines at the departure port, until after tying up at the arrival port. So why do we shut ours off? A radar guard zone would have saved the OP from this. Radar with a guard zone set is a huge enhancement to watchkeeping. Not a substitute, however.


What the OP's insurance covers can only be determined by reading the policy. What is covered varies according to the provider and according to the policy.

[DShant]

Rereading Boatpoker's post I would like to emphasize what he said. Be careful how you deal with the insurance company. They are not really your friend.


Normally you don't take their first offer. It is usually too low by a margin, and they will increase it. If you feel it is really low get your own adjuster. Don't rely on theirs. There are a lot of tricks in this game!

[donradcliffe]

Sorry to hear about this. You and the other boat were probably both on autopilot. By any chance was your autopilot steering to a waypoint? If both boats were steering to waypoints, the odds of head on collisions like this are greatly multiplied.

[leecea]

Not sure that it matters but the Colregs includes "...by all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision" so I'm never sure whether having a functional radar but having it turned off means you are not in compliance.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by leecea

Not sure that it matters but the Colregs includes "...by all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision" so I'm never sure whether having a functional radar but having it turned off means you are not in compliance.

I agree.



There is an argument that radar adds nothing to a sharp visual watch in conditions of daylight and good visibility.



But a moot point as radar (with guard zone set up) would definitely have helped in this case.


I run my radar like they do on ships -- it is turned on before slipping the lines and is not turned off again until I'm safely tied up at my destination. Whatever conditions of visibility.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Shrew

. . . I'd stop relying so much on AIS.

No one should rely on AIS except as an easier way to calculate CPA and TCPA for targets which are broadcasting AIS. It's not a method of watchkeeping at all.


Radar -- a good radar set, in reasonable sea conditions -- will detect almost anything which could be a collision problem, and without relying on the target broadcasting anything. A far better enhancement to the mandatory watchkeeping by sight and hearing, than AIS.

[more]

Originally Posted by svtickles

We had the unfortunate experience of sailing into another boat at full speed. We were on a port tack and the other vessel was motoring in almost the opposite direction. We didn't see each other. Really disappointing. We were 8 hours in on a passage approaching an island and met the only other vessel around. They were not on AIS which we were checking frequently. Since it was early afternoon, we weren't using the radar. I was actually looking straight ahead and saw them at the last second; and tried to turn away, but the autopilot didn't let me turn the wheel. Not sure it would have helped or made it worse.

No one was injured in either boat.

I'm curious what the insurance will cover...
Since the boat needs to go on the dry, will they pay for hotel accommodation? Car rental? New flights? (We have crew who were supposed to leave in another country we probably won't reach in time).
What has other people's experience been when they lost their "summer home"? (i.e. the boat)

First insurance don't pay you all your damage if boat is 1 day old. why because you are guilty minimum 20% becouse you have radar off,dont watch around you ecc. you first step must be call radio and inform authority accident,wait cost guard,police,port authority come and make document.
my suggestion take lawyer this is tricky maybe you don't receive nothing if police find 0,01 alcohol in blad for example.
second read your insurancy contract everthing is inside.

also Each ship must always conscientiously scout by observation and listening, and by all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and condition, in order to fully assess the situation and the risk of collision.

sombody is 40% sombody 60% guilty who is who i dont know court decide

[mvweebles]

I had the good pleasure to have met a retired underwriter for Lloyds this past winter (he had worked for a couple other insurance companies in his career). At the time, cruiser-related forums were lit-up with a recent example of a boneheaded maneuver that resulted in significant damage to a boat. I asked him if insurance would pay even though the owner/operator screwed-up. He said "Yes - Insurance will write the check. It's all baked into the cake by their actuarials."

A few months ago, a sailboat as lost crossing into Bahia del Sol, El Salvador. The boat was a total loss and was quickly looted. The owner was compensated for the boat to the insured value (which often includes personal belongings) but that was it. He needed a place to stay and of course travel home.

[Renegde_Sailor]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I agree.

There is an argument that radar adds nothing to a sharp visual watch in conditions of daylight and good visibility.

But a moot point as radar (with guard zone set up) would definitely have helped in this case.

I run my radar like they do on ships -- it is turned on before slipping the lines and is not turned off again until I'm safely tied up at my destination. Whatever conditions of visibility.

Originally Posted by Dockhead

No one should rely on AIS except as an easier way to calculate CPA and TCPA for targets which are broadcasting AIS. It's not a method of watchkeeping at all.

Radar -- a good radar set, in reasonable sea conditions -- will detect almost anything which could be a collision problem, and without relying on the target broadcasting anything. A far better enhancement to the mandatory watchkeeping by sight and hearing, than AIS.

I cannot agree with this enough. A long passage, especially if you are not used to making them will erode your situational awareness.

Radar is also going to spot everything that doesn't have AIS and every skipper and watch stander should be aware that not all boats have AIS, and many that do leave it switched off.

Not to mention any type of floating hazard like a dead head or something of the like is not going to have AIS, will be possible but hard to spot with Radar, so standing a proper watch is imperative.

Thus it is a fools errand to rely on AIS.

[sailorboy1]

unless something in your insurance policy says something about rules I doubt rules matters (didn't for me) for coverage

Your insurance policy is about overing the policyholder even if they drive their boat right into the rocks!. If the insurance company wants to chase the other boat and/or their insurance company to recover a payout that is between them

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

Sorry to hear about this. You and the other boat were probably both on autopilot. By any chance was your autopilot steering to a waypoint? If both boats were steering to waypoints, the odds of head on collisions like this are greatly multiplied.

Yup.


I've known of several, including a dockmate, that set the pilot to a lat/lon on the chart and sailed right into an ATN. It was only ~ 2 feet off dead center.


Liability-only insurance, yes, I get the apportionment of responsibility. But full coverage is there to cover screw-ups. Read the policy.


---


The cases I have read, when neither kept watch, were 50/50. Yes, sail is stand on, but if no one was watching it doesn't matter, does it? Nothing in the rules says that sail can keep a lesser watch. See also rule 17.

[Montanan]

Sorry to hear of the accident. Glad to hear that there were no injuries.

Research and review the maritime laws of the country the collision occurred to determine if one needs to and how to report the accident to the authorities.

Every country is unique.

If there had been injuries then be assured that a report likely needs to happen promptly, i.e., the same day. Do not delay on reporting if required.

From the description, it is evident that both parties did not stand a proper watch. I suspect that one may become uninsurable due to the negligence of operating the vessel. Damage claims will likely be apportioned to both vessels. Insurance reimbursement will be determined based on the specifics of the policies and facts of the incidence.

Good luck.

[Marathon1150]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

Do not discuss the claim with your insurance broker or underwriter on the phone, they will record the conversation and you will not have a copy of it.

Yes they will record the conversation. In Canada, you have the right to request a copy and the insurance company cannot decline the request. The law may vary in other countries.

Be careful what you say - it might help to write down your version of the accident before hand in order to keep the facts straight.

[Nicholson58]

Be aware that under sail your boat yields leeway. Its true line is a crab angle to windward and a slide too leeward. As such it is imperative to keep watch below the jib. Typical slide to leeward is about 5-8 degrees unless you are a high performance shape. The additional crab angle may cut off several more degrees of the field of view.