Just got hit head-on by a sailboat

[Seevee]

Originally Posted by BandB

Glad to see your defense of the industry and sorry you have to do so online. I've dealt with many insurance companies over the years and only had one unpleasant experience with all the others good.

As to suing an insurer, it's much like suing a company of any sort you feel in some way merits it. Standard policy is that once a company is sued, all handling of the matter goes to the legal department. The claims department is completely out of the picture just as all other departments in a business are. Ultimately there may be some negotiation, after a significant delay, but it will take place with legal. The feeling is that once you sue, you have turned it into a legal matter. You've made the decision that's how it is to be handled. You've said it cannot be resolved with claims. You sue any major business and the only people who will talk to you from that point forward are lawyers.

BandB

That's not entirely correct, but a lot of big businesses would want you to believe that. negotiated with a higher up in a fortune 300 company that sued my company over an equipment lease that I didn't pay. He was a gentleman and easy to talk to. I simply showed him fraudulent documents that his sales person had created for a maintenance contract and he ended up giving me the equipment to end this deal. It was a long crazy deal, but the lawyers were basically on the back burner, to file necessary papers.

I've had another dock company that I was in court with and I negotiated right with the owner, and not his lawyer. I offered a settlement to make it go away which was refused, and glad. Because in fighting this I had the county inspector testify that it was not installed to code, and the guy folded.

All this stuff is a PITA, and there's a strong argument to avoid if at all possible.

But, I'm glad to be out of business.... takes WAY too much time away from boating.

[Seevee]

Originally Posted by Pau Hana

Well, I still disagree with you.

I work in the marine insurance industry (note my sig)- 14 years on the retail side, and for the past 1.5 years as a marine underwriter (I am the national manager for Charter Underwriting for GEICO Marine). I work with retail agents internal sales, and claims daily.

Insurance is not an evil entity designed to engender adversarial engagements- rather, it is in place to make you (or others) whole based on the merits of a claim.

You cannot guarantee anybody rates will go up as a result of a claim. That would amount to a guaranteed penalty for exercising your insurance, which would be illegal in a number of ways. Likewise, most yacht insurers offer haulout assistance for named storms and towing coverage- both are claims, and both do not add any A/P (additional premium) to a policy as a result of filing. What about damage at a marina that is not the fault of the insured, but covered by the marina? Again, claims that do not penalize the insured.

Marine insurance contracts are governed by a legal principle called uberrimae fidei" or "uttermost good faith". This means that all aspects of the risk must be disclosed by all parties- this means that a claim (such as this one) should be reported to the OP's insurer.

As far as suing/threatening to sue an insurance company- it is anybody's right to do so, but know that threatening legal action does nothing to make a marine insurance company tremble in fear and settle a claim any quicker. Nor are any claims adjustors required to "pay a full claim if there is credible legal threat"- in my experience, the claims process is usually slowed or halted when the claim escalates to legal action.

I don't know where you get your info about "an insurance company paying only a percentage of the cost" or any of the other stuff you present in your arguments, but I can say with authority that it is not correct in my profession. I did read all your arguments, and they sound more like information gleaned from internet searches based on disgruntled people that actual policy claims.

The disgruntled folks I've run into expect every loss scenario to be covered, and never bother to read their policy to ascertain what is covered and what is not. when a claim occurs, these same people sing to the high heavens how "they were screwed/how insurance companies are evil/how you never want to make a claim because your rates will go up".

If this is your argument, why do you have ay insurance coverage at all?

Pau,

Nice to hear from a professional in the insurance business.

I could make a strong argument to keep this simple, get it over with and go on with life. Seems like the sailor is cooperating and that's the person I'd deal with, not his insurance co. Make sense?

[Seevee]

Another point...

There's been some implication that someone doing a job on the side is incompetent, illegitimate, not licensed, insured and will botch the job. Nothing could be further from the truth.

First, a license and insurance will not guarantee anything, or prevent a lousy job or incompetent work.

Second, it's the skill of the actual person doing the work and HIS integrity that will guarantee a job well done. (And if a company is run right, they will hold him responsible and provide the back up for a good job)

Third, there's nothing better than talking with the guy who will do the work. Gives a complete understanding of what will be done, issues, follow ups right from the guy who is doing the work.

Forth, I could STRONGLY argue that one will get better quality, more timely service and a better job dealing with small companies and individuals that with a big marina.

Two of my main mechanics are individuals, both very sharp and do good work. But talking directly with them is a HUGE benefit. I save TIME, but not a lot of money. The money I save is in buying my own parts.

[bayview]

No side deals.Your boat was in an accident and for future sale you want clear records of professional survey and repair. Use a yard and surveyor.

[gaston]

83 posts and I still cant understand. If your insured and get hit by another boat and that other boat was at fault why not just let the insurance company's work it out ?? Then if the damage isn't repaired to a high standard or faults appear in the repair some time later its still the insurance company problem not the owner ???

[dhays]

Originally Posted by gaston

83 posts and I still cant understand. If your insured and get hit by another boat and that other boat was at fault why not just let the insurance company's work it out ?? Then if the damage isn't repaired to a high standard or faults appear in the repair some time later its still the insurance company problem not the owner ???

This is my thought as well.

[koliver]

Originally Posted by gaston

83 posts and I still cant understand. If your insured and get hit by another boat and that other boat was at fault why not just let the insurance company's work it out ?? Then if the damage isn't repaired to a high standard or faults appear in the repair some time later its still the insurance company problem not the owner ???

I agree.
This is why you have coverage, so you need to get out of the equation and let your adjuster take over. You can oversee the work done and complain if the quality does not measure up, but as far as responsibilities go, none of that is for you to worry about.

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
It's my understanding that once an insurance claim is paid out one is required to sign off on the claim with no further expectation of remuneration.

[BandB]

Originally Posted by RT Firefly

Greetings,
It's my understanding that once an insurance claim is paid out one is required to sign off on the claim with no further expectation of remuneration.

Your key comment was "sign off". That comes after seeing the results and also can be a conditional sign off, subject to any other undiscovered damage which must be found within x time.

[Pau Hana]

Originally Posted by RT Firefly

Greetings,
It's my understanding that once an insurance claim is paid out one is required to sign off on the claim with no further expectation of remuneration.

As BandB stated, this is correct- however, resultant/consequential damage found later can be means to reopen the claim.

[Northern Spy]

I have nothing of value to add to the conversation. But I do read the title as "Just got hit on the head with a sailboat."

Everytime.

[Gmarr]

Risk averse =using reputable company with verifiable insurance who will sign a service contract that includes indemnification and warranty. It's also accompany that "usually" and "if" something goes wrong down the line is still in business and willingly available to do the repair/rework.

[BruceK]

It must be US insurers have a kind benevolent attitude to reimbursing third parties who suffer loss due to the actions of their insured. Here, as a third party, you could expect claim minimization, requiring a release before payment, and great reluctance to get involved in the repair process of your boat. Over there it sounds like the offending party`s insurer effectively becomes your insurer, which is great if that`s how it works.

[BandB]

Originally Posted by BruceK

It must be US insurers have a kind benevolent attitude to reimbursing third parties who suffer loss due to the actions of their insured. Here, as a third party, you could expect claim minimization, requiring a release before payment, and great reluctance to get involved in the repair process of your boat. Over there it sounds like the offending party`s insurer effectively becomes your insurer, which is great if that`s how it works.

They are all a bit different. Some insurers are known to take better care of their customer than the other party. Other insurers are known to take better care of the other party than their own customer. Now, insurers can be difficult, especially when there is any injury involved. However, when you're just talking about property damage to a car or boat, generally pretty fair. Plus, understand this is such a small claim. If we were talking a sinking of a $20 million yacht, it would be far different, but in the realm of one or two thousand then the adjusters and claim representatives have considerable leeway. If the OP was claiming whiplash and inability to work or function and all the real but invisible injuries one can have, then it wouldn't be so simple.

[roguewave]

Originally Posted by northern spy

i have nothing of value to add to the conversation. But i do read the title as "just got hit on the head with a sailboat."

everytime.

+1 :d

[MichaelB1969]

Quick update. First of all, for those who read my post as "got hit on the head with a sailboat", I will say that I nearly did!

Anyway, I ended up taking the advice of most on this thread, including some insurance pros (thanks) and asking the guy to file a claim with his insurance company. I also called my insurance company and gave them a heads up. BTW, they assured me that my policy would be unaffected by this.

I sent a text to the guy who hit our boat this morning saying I felt uncomfortable with the side deal since any unexpected damage could cause the bill to be higher, and that while I was sure he was honest, it exposed me to more risk than I was comfortable with. He responded by saying "No problem. I understand."

About 15 minutes later, after I spoke to my insurance guy, I texted the guy who hit our boat again and said that my agent said that he should file a claim with his insurance company, who would then get in contact with me. That was this morning, and haven't heard back.

I assume I will hear back, but curious what would happen if he never responds. Would I go back to my insurance company who would then go after him? Again, assuming this isn't going to happen as he seemed like a stand up guy, but you never know...

Mike

[gaston]

[Pau Hana]

Originally Posted by MichaelB1969

Quick update. First of all, for those who read my post as "got hit on the head with a sailboat", I will say that I nearly did!

Anyway, I ended up taking the advice of most on this thread, including some insurance pros (thanks) and asking the guy to file a claim with his insurance company. I also called my insurance company and gave them a heads up. BTW, they assured me that my policy would be unaffected by this.

I sent a text to the guy who hit our boat this morning saying I felt uncomfortable with the side deal since any unexpected damage could cause the bill to be higher, and that while I was sure he was honest, it exposed me to more risk than I was comfortable with. He responded by saying "No problem. I understand."

About 15 minutes later, after I spoke to my insurance guy, I texted the guy who hit our boat again and said that my agent said that he should file a claim with his insurance company, who would then get in contact with me. That was this morning, and haven't heard back.

I assume I will hear back, but curious what would happen if he never responds. Would I go back to my insurance company who would then go after him? Again, assuming this isn't going to happen as he seemed like a stand up guy, but you never know...

Mike

Mike, do you have his insurance info? If you do, you can file a claim against his policy.

If he does not respond, you can have your insurer complete the repairs, and let your insurer go after him.

[AusCan]

Originally Posted by Northern Spy

I have nothing of value to add to the conversation. But I do read the title as "Just got hit on the head with a sailboat."

Everytime.

+1

Me too. I had visions of an sailboat alongside having an uncontrolled gybe.

[MichaelB1969]

Originally Posted by Pau Hana

Mike, do you have his insurance info? If you do, you can file a claim against his policy.

If he does not respond, you can have your insurer complete the repairs, and let your insurer go after him.

Hey there, thanks for your help on this. I do not have his insurance info. I guess we'll see if I get a response tomorrow and go from there.

Best,
Mike