"Roger Long" wrote in message
news
Insurance is common. I'm not aware of it being mandatory
anywhere but it never occurred to me to go without it so I
didn't check. It is reasonable in cost and not hard to get.
They want to see a survey and some sailing references so, if I'd
said, "I just bought this boat and I don't know nuttin'.", I
might not have gotten the insurance.

I made a comment on jury behavior in another thread. Aviation
judgements go through the roof compared similar injury in other
activities. It's not just the pilots insurance but the costs
past on in the cost of everything else. About 20% of the cost
of an airplane is the manufacturer's liability insurance load.

Well, the conclusions I'm forming a

1. Aviation insurance effects are not a good model for boat
insurance effects.

2. Third party boat insurance is common in USA, therefore
inexpensive, but not universal.

3. Making third party insurance compulsory for boats over a
certain size/speed may have unwanted side effects, which should be
investigated. Some side effects are the need for policing, and
penalties for infringement. Ingenuity and use of the market place
should deal with these, but there may be other cosiderations which
my limited imagination isn't coping with. Think car insurance?

4. If those side effects don't kill the idea, this does sound
like a sensible alternative to licencing. It deals with boat
damage by third parties. As the market develops, the insurers will
start to differentiate between their clients, implementing cheaper
policies for some groups (licenced sailors? Those who've attended
training courses? Those who don't have claims?).

Indeed, why are licences so often a chosen control method in law?
They don't deal with the unwanted side effects of ignorance or
carelessness.


--
JimB
http://www.jimbaerselman.f2s.com/
for opinions comparing Greek cruising areas - and Spain