Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 04-10-2016, 07:25 AM   #21
Guru
 
angus99's Avatar
 
City: Signal Mtn., TN
Country: US
Vessel Name: Stella Maris
Vessel Model: Defever 44
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Insequent View Post
Seems to me the PO is being told that they don't want his business, but in a strange way. I agree that a specialist marine insurer is the best way to go. I hope you can get hold of Pau Hana - they looked after me well when I was in North America with the boat.
Emails to Peter at Anchor Marine bounce back with the contact info of a different broker at Anchor and the note that Peter has taken a position as an underwriter somewhere else. He hasn't responded to any PMs so he may not be watching the forum anymore.

In any event, I'm talking to other brokers some of you have suggested. Again, many thanks.
__________________
Advertisement

angus99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 08:42 AM   #22
Art
Guru
 
Art's Avatar
 
City: SF Bay Area
Country: USA
Vessel Model: Tollycraft 34' Tri Cabin
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by angus99 View Post
Well, I've narrowed it down so much, I might as well. . It's Pantaenius. And they are portraying this as a "select" policy for boats with agreed hull values of less than $250K, which mine is just under. Full loss is covered to the limits of the policy. Partial losses for boats more than 5 years of age are subject to 50% depreciation. ('Younger" boats under this policy have a lower depreciation factor.) The prior policy I had with them did not have these limits. So I don't get the sense they're after me individually, but as a class of boater they might be. I'm sure I'll be walking but I want to talk to a rep to see what's behind this and to ensure I'm not missing something. Will post what I learn.
When as happened... of suddenly doubling my annual insurance premium (see my post # 14): I immediately called my ins broker and asked why did my boat insurance cost double having had no claims or late payments?? She got back to me and said when she called the carrier (one of largest insurance cos in U.S.) all she could find out was that they virtually doubled all insured "boats" (notice the "parenthesis" on boats) in my area due to potential losses from "weather disturbances that may occur" (again "parenthesis"). I said to my trusted, decades utilized agent: Barbara, baby!... We have our boat under covered berth at a quality marina in one of the most mellow sea condition, gentle weather areas on west coast (i.e. deep inside SF Delta's fresh water)... how can they suddenly say that? She said she tried to get them to drop the annual back down but could not. They are stuck on this weather issue.

Soooo... It took me a couple hours of phone calls and re calls, introducing myself as CEO of one of my companies, to executives at my ins carrier's HQ. I eventually needed to get stern over the phone with one of the VP's in Actuary. This is exactly what I was told by this woman (in a near whisper voice): "Please do not pass on that I told your this." I said "Agreed". Then she whispered... "Our company has raised rates on boats in most areas due to huge hurricane losses on south east coast." I then asked: "Because my boat is always kept in such a protected area can I get consideration for at least partial premium cost drop, back down to previous levels?" She answered: "I'm sorry I can't help you there." I said: "In that case, even after years of being a good customer to your company it seems I am now forced to shop around for more reasonable rates." She said: "Wish I could help you more, but, I can not." End of conversation!
__________________

Art is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 09:10 AM   #23
Enigma
 
RT Firefly's Avatar
 
City: Slicker?
Country: Bumpkin?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,997
Greetings,
I ran into a "change" in my former policy as well a couple of years back. The new stipulation was our boat had to be hauled and stored ashore in the event of a named storm for coverage to remain in effect. The ironic part was the closest storage yards were in an area that historically bore the full brunt, to the point of SERIOUS damage to shore facilities, of most hurricanes that ran up the east coast.

I called the agent and asked "So you want me to move my vessel from a known hurricane hole into the potential path of destruction?" The answer was "Yes". I asked what the rational for THAT bit of rocket science was and the answer was "That's the way the insurance company wanted it".

This was very shortly after Sandy where, as I explained to the agent, the most damaged vessels had been ashore and not afloat. New company time for me.
__________________
RTF
RT Firefly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 11:19 AM   #24
Wannabe
 
Britannia's Avatar
 
City: SF Bay Area
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Stillwater
Vessel Model: Kadey-Krogen 54
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 766
Quote:
Originally Posted by angus99 View Post
Emails to Peter at Anchor Marine bounce back with the contact info of a different broker at Anchor and the note that Peter has taken a position as an underwriter somewhere else. He hasn't responded to any PMs so he may not be watching the forum anymore.

In any event, I'm talking to other brokers some of you have suggested. Again, many thanks.
When Peter left I was switched to Sam at Anchor Marine. He did a good job switching me to a policy that included liveaboard for my 1988 Krogen 54. I can provide you his contact info if you wish.

Richard
Britannia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 12:06 PM   #25
Guru
 
angus99's Avatar
 
City: Signal Mtn., TN
Country: US
Vessel Name: Stella Maris
Vessel Model: Defever 44
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Britannia View Post
When Peter left I was switched to Sam at Anchor Marine. He did a good job switching me to a policy that included liveaboard for my 1988 Krogen 54. I can provide you his contact info if you wish.

Richard
Thanks Richard. Peter's auto reply referred me to Michelle at Anchor and she's already gotten back with me. Appreciate the thought.
angus99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 12:16 PM   #26
Wannabe
 
Britannia's Avatar
 
City: SF Bay Area
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Stillwater
Vessel Model: Kadey-Krogen 54
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 766
Quote:
Originally Posted by angus99 View Post
Thanks Richard. Peter's auto reply referred me to Michelle at Anchor and she's already gotten back with me. Appreciate the thought.
Great - glad you're being taken care of.

Richard
Britannia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 12:23 PM   #27
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by angus99 View Post
Well, I've narrowed it down so much, I might as well. . It's Pantaenius. And they are portraying this as a "select" policy for boats with agreed hull values of less than $250K, which mine is just under. Full loss is covered to the limits of the policy. Partial losses for boats more than 5 years of age are subject to 50% depreciation. ('Younger" boats under this policy have a lower depreciation factor.) The prior policy I had with them did not have these limits. So I don't get the sense they're after me individually, but as a class of boater they might be. I'm sure I'll be walking but I want to talk to a rep to see what's behind this and to ensure I'm not missing something. Will post what I learn.
Well, here's what it sounds like to me. Pantaenius now has Super Yacht, Yacht and Select. This sounds like an effort to concentrate on the larger, more expensive yachts and push others to their "Select" categories and less coverage. However, I see nothing that says the Yacht Policy isn't still available for your boat, just have no idea the cost.

Here is the page comparing.

Pantaenius Yacht Insurance Comparison

You can see with the Yacht Policy there is no depreciation on partial losses. With the Select policy there is on boats over 5 years old. There are many other differences. The Select policy has lousy coverage.
BandB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 12:48 PM   #28
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,180
Are you dealing with a broker or with their office directly? Just curious as to whether they've put in a hard rule that under $250k you can only get the select policy.

Regardless, their business has traditionally been bigger and more expensive boats, so it doesn't surprise me. Their premiums for $20 million and up boats are $75k and more. Many of the boats they insure are $50 million to $200 million. Sounds like they've said, "We want the smaller less expensive boat business as long as we don't have to offer them anything decent."

I've long had a business policy. If I bring you my business, I expect to always be given your best price and treated well. I don't intend to shop around every year. However, if you ever force me to shop around and I find out you're taking advantage of me, then I'm gone. And, no, you won't be given a chance to match or second chance, not for a minimum of three years.

Had I been a loyal Pantaenius customer and they pulled this on me, whether individually or as part of a group, I'd be long gone. That insult and audacity that they just thought you would say "Thank you, now kick me again" or blindly accept it.

That 50% deductible even for fire and lightning, no coverage for latent defects, no automatic insurance for new boats, deductible on personal items, no coverage of art, none of a substitute vessel, 50% deductible on transportation and storage, no coverage of living expenses, no wear and tear, no skipper's liability. This policy is everything that Pantaenius has advertised against for decades, all they said they weren't.

I think it's insane they started offering it a couple of years ago, more insane if they're forcing people to it, and they would have been far better off just saying they no longer wanted to insure certain boats than saying "we'll insure you, just not our real policy, a lousy one."
BandB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 01:22 PM   #29
Guru
 
angus99's Avatar
 
City: Signal Mtn., TN
Country: US
Vessel Name: Stella Maris
Vessel Model: Defever 44
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by BandB View Post
Are you dealing with a broker or with their office directly? Just curious as to whether they've put in a hard rule that under $250k you can only get the select policy.

Regardless, their business has traditionally been bigger and more expensive boats, so it doesn't surprise me. Their premiums for $20 million and up boats are $75k and more. Many of the boats they insure are $50 million to $200 million. Sounds like they've said, "We want the smaller less expensive boat business as long as we don't have to offer them anything decent."

I've long had a business policy. If I bring you my business, I expect to always be given your best price and treated well. I don't intend to shop around every year. However, if you ever force me to shop around and I find out you're taking advantage of me, then I'm gone. And, no, you won't be given a chance to match or second chance, not for a minimum of three years.

Had I been a loyal Pantaenius customer and they pulled this on me, whether individually or as part of a group, I'd be long gone. That insult and audacity that they just thought you would say "Thank you, now kick me again" or blindly accept it.

That 50% deductible even for fire and lightning, no coverage for latent defects, no automatic insurance for new boats, deductible on personal items, no coverage of art, none of a substitute vessel, 50% deductible on transportation and storage, no coverage of living expenses, no wear and tear, no skipper's liability. This policy is everything that Pantaenius has advertised against for decades, all they said they weren't.

I think it's insane they started offering it a couple of years ago, more insane if they're forcing people to it, and they would have been far better off just saying they no longer wanted to insure certain boats than saying "we'll insure you, just not our real policy, a lousy one."
I dealt with their headquarters. Their letter to me indicates it's a hard rule . . . and a recently enacted one.

I couldn't agree more with your assessment. If they'd said outright they didn't want to insure boats like mine, I'd have looked for a company that did and not have to go insurance shopping again. I even object to the BS brand "Select" policy when the coverage is less and the premium more. It will be interesting to hear why they're doing this and I'll post what I hear.
angus99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 01:32 PM   #30
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by angus99 View Post
I dealt with their headquarters. Their letter to me indicates it's a hard rule . . . and a recently enacted one.

I couldn't agree more with your assessment. If they'd said outright they didn't want to insure boats like mine, I'd have looked for a company that did and not have to go insurance shopping again. I even object to the BS brand "Select" policy when the coverage is less and the premium more. It will be interesting to hear why they're doing this and I'll post what I hear.
"Select" has become a popular term for less. I'm not sure how that happened. Medicare uses it. What's the lowest quality beef..."Select". Well, there is ungraded, but the lowest most groceries will carry.

We know the "why". It just stinks. They were one of two companies we had make proposals to us initially. Right now, I'm very glad I chose the other one. The reason we chose the other one ultimately was that I've used them in business and in many countries, and never once have they doubled or tripled rates or said, we can't cover this any more or through other actions made it clear they wanted us gone.
BandB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 02:06 PM   #31
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,180
Reminds me of:

I was young, just out of school, first job other than summer, my own sideline business and working in father's office. We had manufacturing in Jamaica. The year was early 1990. We got a notice from our property insurer in Jamaica.

Seems Gilbert had been through in 1988 and the company had filed a $250k claim against a $40 million policy. It was a nice either/or notice. Either pay 10 times the premium or do the following:

-Have the Jamaican government (owner of our building) replace it with one built to 150 mph hurricane standards.
-Have the building fully sprinklered with a wet sprinkler system.

Now, to know the nature of the claim filed. It was water damage from the flood. Nothing from the storm. No damage to the building. So the building (and all the others in that free zone) came through with no issues but now it must be torn down and replaced. As to wet sprinkler systems, seems odd this requirement comes about after flood damage rather than fire. We did ask them if they knew anything about the water pressure in the area and then informed them there wasn't enough to support a wet system. When all you can get is a trickle of flow, you're not going to be able to sprinkle a 200,000 sq ft building.

Clearly, they like others had losses from Gilbert. We were actually proof however to the relative safety. Well, we got another insurer who came in at the same rate we'd had before the hurricane.

It's like all the talk about hurricane plans and coverage in Florida and not to have your boat below a certain point that all peaked again after Sandy. Yet, if you went by Sandy, Florida is 100% safe and you should declare the Northeast to be a hurricane zone and require all boats to stay below a certain point. Simply, they'd suffered big losses and were attempting to recover from anywhere they could. You also hear insurers say you must go north of the state line during a hurricane, and refusing to insure if you won't. Yet, there are more boats in South Florida than anywhere else and the vast majority of those don't move north during a hurricane and are insured.

When I first noticed Pantaenius added the Select Policy I wrote a very brief email to the person we'd dealt with reading "What the h... is this? Why? Horrible idea." I had no idea at that time that they were going to force people into that plan.
BandB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 03:29 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
Wataworld's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Wataworld
Vessel Model: Defever 44+5
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 127
Boat insurance

Hi Angus
I am not a Pantaneius supporter. How ever they did the same to me I have a 99 Defever 49 CPMY after I spoke to them about their renewal offer of Select corporate told me he was in a meeting about their product decssion and when he called me back he said that their decision was in fact claims related however it appears that decision was less than favorable for the company and they are reversing it for larger boats so they have sent me a renewal offer in their yacht program however it did send me shopping and their are alot of carriers available to us so if you are still interested you might try back so at least you can include them in your comparison. I might add I am an agent for the last 38 years in Florida and have seen poor decisions from bean counters over the years we should not be shocked by any of their moves they are made from fear to protect their company!
My 2 Cents
Gregg
Wataworld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 04:07 PM   #33
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wataworld View Post
Hi Angus
I am not a Pantaneius supporter. How ever they did the same to me I have a 99 Defever 49 CPMY after I spoke to them about their renewal offer of Select corporate told me he was in a meeting about their product decssion and when he called me back he said that their decision was in fact claims related however it appears that decision was less than favorable for the company and they are reversing it for larger boats so they have sent me a renewal offer in their yacht program however it did send me shopping and their are alot of carriers available to us so if you are still interested you might try back so at least you can include them in your comparison. I might add I am an agent for the last 38 years in Florida and have seen poor decisions from bean counters over the years we should not be shocked by any of their moves they are made from fear to protect their company!
My 2 Cents
Gregg
Very interesting. Nice to hear they are reconsidering.
BandB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 09:13 PM   #34
Guru
 
angus99's Avatar
 
City: Signal Mtn., TN
Country: US
Vessel Name: Stella Maris
Vessel Model: Defever 44
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wataworld View Post
Hi Angus
I am not a Pantaneius supporter. How ever they did the same to me I have a 99 Defever 49 CPMY after I spoke to them about their renewal offer of Select corporate told me he was in a meeting about their product decssion and when he called me back he said that their decision was in fact claims related however it appears that decision was less than favorable for the company and they are reversing it for larger boats so they have sent me a renewal offer in their yacht program however it did send me shopping and their are alot of carriers available to us so if you are still interested you might try back so at least you can include them in your comparison. I might add I am an agent for the last 38 years in Florida and have seen poor decisions from bean counters over the years we should not be shocked by any of their moves they are made from fear to protect their company!
My 2 Cents
Gregg
Thanks a lot, Gregg; that's good to know. I was planning to talk to someone as high up the food chain as I can get and ask if this is cast in stone. I'll see if they want me as a return customer. I have two other quotes pending and I'm going to give them all a good look.
angus99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 11:26 PM   #35
Guru
 
BruceK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 7,573
As with Aussies Brian and Peter posting above, my cover is with Club Marine, part of Allianz. Pantaneius was strongly represented at recent Sydney BoatShows. We took the caps offered, but not the insurance.
Recently an on land insurer here(Suncorp) reversed a silly underwriting rule against covering "attached" dwellings, that cover went elsewhere, with several others. Losing business seems to promote rethinking. Maybe Pantaneius will return your loyalty by reconsidering, assuming you still want them after this.
__________________
BruceK
Island Gypsy 36 Europa "Doriana"
Sydney Australia
BruceK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 03:40 PM   #36
Guru
 
angus99's Avatar
 
City: Signal Mtn., TN
Country: US
Vessel Name: Stella Maris
Vessel Model: Defever 44
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,388
So I talked to Pantaenius today and my experience was much like Gregg's. A very polite and contrite representative said their underwriters have reversed the new "Select" requirement and apologized for the inconvenience. I had a new quote in my inbox within 30 minutes. However, as I explained to her, the damage may already be done. The unilateral notice I initially received really irritated me and I am both getting additional quotes and paying MUCH more attention to obtaining a better overall deal than I otherwise might have. I will sum up by saying they have been a very good company to work with until this experience and I can only speculate what might have been going on internally to cause this fiasco.

Thanks to all for the many thoughtful posts.
angus99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 04:26 PM   #37
Guru
 
twistedtree's Avatar
 
City: Gloucester, MA
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,202
I would place the insurance elsewhere just on principal.

Pantaenius did something similar to me last year, raising rates and severely restricting my cruising range. It was very clear that they were trying to cull out certain provisions in policies. The navigation restriction would have been ok for the ensuing year, but I dumped them anyway. i'm with BandB - if I discover you are taking advantage of me, then you are dead to me.
__________________
www.MVTanglewood.com
twistedtree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 05:48 PM   #38
Guru
 
mbevins's Avatar
 
City: Windsor
Country: Canada
Vessel Name: Keeper IV
Vessel Model: 44 Viking ACMY
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedtree View Post
I would place the insurance elsewhere just on principal.

Pantaenius did something similar to me last year, raising rates and severely restricting my cruising range. It was very clear that they were trying to cull out certain provisions in policies. The navigation restriction would have been ok for the ensuing year, but I dumped them anyway. i'm with BandB - if I discover you are taking advantage of me, then you are dead to me.
Absolutely correct. Time to move.
__________________
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."

mbevins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 11:40 PM   #39
Guru
 
Hawgwash's Avatar
 
City: Sidney
Country: Canada
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by BandB;
Very interesting. Nice to hear they are reconsidering.
This has been an interesting discussion and I wonder if there is any correlation between the new age recreational boaters and claims.

Taking Acts of God and large crewed yachts out of the equation, has the ratio of claims to boats increased? If it has, then I wonder if older boats just became an easy target.

I can't find any actuarial statistics.
Hawgwash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 11:56 PM   #40
Guru
 
angus99's Avatar
 
City: Signal Mtn., TN
Country: US
Vessel Name: Stella Maris
Vessel Model: Defever 44
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawgwash View Post
This has been an interesting discussion and I wonder if there is any correlation between the new age recreational boaters and claims.

Taking Acts of God and large crewed yachts out of the equation, has the ratio of claims to boats increased? If it has, then I wonder if older boats just became an easy target.

I can't find any actuarial statistics.
Well, for sure I like the sound of "new age" better than "aged" boater.

The only stat I can give you is one claim in 57 years of boating . . . for fouling a mooring pennant; no damage and the short haul didn't meet my deductible.
__________________

angus99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012