To claim, or not to claim.

[sailingharry]

First, I'm surprised we don't have a whole sub forum dedicated to insurance! It seems to come up frequently, and when I searched I found questions all over the site.

We have a 24-year-old boat in very good condition. We have been insured with BoatUS since we bought it in 2019, so 3 years ago. In addition I have a decade with BoatUS on my previous boat. We've never had a claim.

Yesterday, coming out of Old Montreal in 6 to 7 knots of current, the engine died. 100% my fault, but nonetheless it died. With no headway, we slid into the concrete bulkhead at 6 to 7 knots. Fortunately, our arch took over 90% of the impact and damage.

A smattering of small change damage, such as an older stack pack sail cover and bimini top, a GPS antenna, and a solar panel.

While the boat is well into the BoatUS depreciation debacle, the arch can be documented as only 8 years old. I have discussed with the arch builder, Klacko out of Ontario Canada, and he has ball parked 12 to 15k. I assume another 5k for a yard to remove and reinstall, including all the mounted gear.

I think that even after our high deductible, this probably qualifies as a claim worth filing. But that's not the question.

My concern is the attitudes and practices I've heard mentioned here. If I file a claim, and they pay $5 or $10k -- and then turn around and cancel my policy, that's not a good outcome!

Does anyone here have experience with BoatUS, specifically, using a claim that was the result of policyholder negligence as reason for non-renewal?

On a related note, we are on an extended cruise and will not be home to Maryland until early October. We have stabilized the damage and can continue our cruise. I am concerned about the inability to have an appraisal or any estimates done until then. If I document the incident now, does time lose its urgency?

[Orion Jim]

If you feel you will file a claim contact your agent immediately. They will want a surveyor to document the damage immediately. Use your ships log to document any and all actions taken prior to and immediately after the accident (these should already exist). Contemporaneous notes carry weight in court…..vague recollections of the incident do little to assist your cause.

[AllenRbrts]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

First, I'm surprised we don't have a whole sub forum dedicated to insurance! It seems to come up frequently, and when I searched I found questions all over the site.

We have a 24-year-old boat in very good condition. We have been insured with BoatUS since we bought it in 2019, so 3 years ago. In addition I have a decade with BoatUS on my previous boat. We've never had a claim.

Yesterday, coming out of Old Montreal in 6 to 7 knots of current, the engine died. 100% my fault, but nonetheless it died. With no headway, we slid into the concrete bulkhead at 6 to 7 knots. Fortunately, our arch took over 90% of the impact and damage.

A smattering of small change damage, such as an older stack pack sail cover and bimini top, a GPS antenna, and a solar panel.

While the boat is well into the BoatUS depreciation debacle, the arch can be documented as only 8 years old. I have discussed with the arch builder, Klacko out of Ontario Canada, and he has ball parked 12 to 15k. I assume another 5k for a yard to remove and reinstall, including all the mounted gear.

I think that even after our high deductible, this probably qualifies as a claim worth filing. But that's not the question.

My concern is the attitudes and practices I've heard mentioned here. If I file a claim, and they pay $5 or $10k -- and then turn around and cancel my policy, that's not a good outcome!

Does anyone here have experience with BoatUS, specifically, using a claim that was the result of policyholder negligence as reason for non-renewal?

On a related note, we are on an extended cruise and will not be home to Maryland until early October. We have stabilized the damage and can continue our cruise. I am concerned about the inability to have an appraisal or any estimates done until then. If I document the incident now, does time lose its urgency?

If you file a claim you will need to disclose this for years on any application for new insurance. I filed a claim for 5k of lightning damage 6 years ago and still need to disclose it. I’m not sure the claim was worth it.

[JoetheCobbler]

Why would you pay insurance premiums for 10-15 yrs and when a covered incident occurs, you're contemplating whether or not to utilize the coverage you've already paid for?
Definitely file.

[S/V Illusion]

Two choices:
1. Self insure, or
2. Buy insurance.

Never do both

[AllenRbrts]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

Two choices:
1. Self insure, or
2. Buy insurance.

Never do both

If I had a major loss I would file; small claims I think not. We found it difficult to get coverage for offshore, not sure I would make it more difficult by having to disclose a previous small claim.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by JoetheCobbler

Why would you pay insurance premiums for 10-15 yrs and when a covered incident occurs, you're contemplating whether or not to utilize the coverage you've already paid for?
Definitely file.

As I stated in my post, my concern is the ripple effect. If this were comparable to the automotive market, I wouldn't even hesitate. But when you accidentally drive into a telephone pole, the insurance company fixes your car and continues to ensure you.

I would hate to file a $10,000 claim, and discover next July that they won't renew my policy. I would find a future total loss without insurance to be worse than absorbing this loss.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by AllenRbrts

If I had a major loss I would file; small claims I think not. We found it difficult to get coverage for offshore, not sure I would make it more difficult by having to disclose a previous small claim.

This is precisely my concern. And the claim falls between a major loss and a small claim. Large enough to represent a good many years of premiums, but small enough to suck it up if it makes sense.

[MicHughV]

"Insurance" has to be, without a doubt, the biggest legal "racket" on this planet.

These days everybody and everything carries insurance of one kind or another.

Insurance companies are not in the business of "paying claims"...they are in the business of extracting dollars from your pocket.

I see no point in paying monthly premiums and not filing a claim. Might as well not carry insurance otherwise.

[Tetepare]

It’s not BoatUS, it’s GEICO. Apparently you are already aware of GEICOs depreciation policy, and it sounds like you’ve heard of their “claim and get dumped” policy. Why anyone would insure with GEICO is beyond me


But you’ve been paying for insurance. Use it. If they dump you they’re doing you a favor. It’s like sticking with an abusive spouse because you’re afraid you won’t find another. Time to make better decisions.

[sailingharry]

Well, I've gone ahead and opened the claim.

Time will tell if they dump me.

Not sure what alternatives exist that are "better decisions" if they do. I personally can't afford to self-insure against a total loss. And I certainly can't self-insure against liability.

I have priced other providers, and I don't like their policies or prices!

[sepharad]

Let us know what happens.

[sepharad]

Originally Posted by MicHughV

"Insurance" has to be, without a doubt, the biggest legal "racket" on this planet.

These days everybody and everything carries insurance of one kind or another.

Insurance companies are not in the business of "paying claims"...they are in the business of extracting dollars from your pocket.

I see no point in paying monthly premiums and not filing a claim. Might as well not carry insurance otherwise.

I am a retired registered nurse. When I speak (specifically about medical insurance) I try to explain what the insurance business is. While it initially began as a way for a collective of ship owners to spread out individual losses to a large group. It then morphed into a profiteering scheme.


Instead of sharing and reducing loss it became maximizing profit.


This model is a DIRECT TRANSFERENCE of Londons gambling bookmakers in the 1600's ( like my uncle Jack). 1) Consider all factors like the skill, vessel, location, season, market etc. 2) Do the mathematical analysis. 3) Set the odds. 4) Set the conditions of payment. 5) Accept the wager.


So what's the difference between a boat insurer and the dog track?
The Gambler: win/place/show/lose...period.


The insurer: Intentionally included exceptions and exclusions followed by protracted efforts to use and manipulation of those exclusions to avoid paying out. It's not about spreading risk, it's about paying stockholders.



To be fair, the insurer can be soundly thrashed by a lot of boats who just happen to be parked where multiple hurricanes hit.


When I explain this process to my patients. And explain they are wagering that they WILL get critically sick and that the insurer will do everything to avoid paying out...they get this glazed look.


Thats why I am a RETIRED RN.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

Two choices:
1. Self insure, or
2. Buy insurance.

Never do both

Indeed!

[Tupaia]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

Yesterday, coming out of Old Montreal in 6 to 7 knots of current, the engine died. 100% my fault, but nonetheless it died. With no headway, we slid into the concrete bulkhead at 6 to 7 knots. Fortunately, our arch took over 90% of the impact and damage

1. There is a difference between "being my fault" and "negligence".
2. Honestly forgetting to do something that results in a claim maybe your fault but is not negligence.
3. This why insurance companies insist that you do not admit liability.