First, let me say, given my current experince I wouldn't recommend BoatUS
insurance. I have the so called Yacht policy which is there "better"
policy, and it and their serice sucks. I had a better deal at the Auto
Club before, who are not "marine experts." I switched to BoatUS (which I
will abreviate hereon as "BS") because it was cheaper and now I see the
error of my ways.

Anyway, here's the problem. Hit a submerged object and tore off my skeg,
bent the prop shaft and deformed the lower housing on my Volvo Penta
outdrive. Made a claim to BS. They're East Coast, I'm West Coast. They
say take it to my local shop and get estimate and send to them. BS says if
I have to replace, they will "depreciate" but if I can repair, they will
pay full cost of repair. Shop looks at it, and says everything inside
probably screwed up so best way to go is to get whole new lower gear case,
about $5K. Send estimate to BS. They say no good, need to do tear down and
see if it can be repaired and they will pay for tear down. OK, fair enough.
Shop tears it down, decides can be repaired by replacing only prop shaft
and case (gears examined and are OK), about $2700 parts and labor. Tear
down charge $250, but will apply to repair when I get it done. Estimate
sent to BS.

I don't hear anything from BS for a week. Called, no response. Emailed
them, and finally they reply "Oh, sent you a check for $2K less $100
deductible." Check does come and that's what it is. Finally I get them on
the phone. Talked to the adjuster and his supervisor. After some heated
discussion, bottom line is that they want to depreciate not the whole unit
replacement, but the individual parts to be replaced, the key ones being
the prop shaft and case. They don't want to put me in a "better position"
than I was before the accident. By the way, my "yacht" is hardly one. Its
an 18 foot 1997 bowrider. It in near perfect condition, mostly because I
don't get to use it much, and when I do it exclusively in fresh water. It
stays covered at all other times. The boat probably has only about 100
hours on it.

BS explains to me that their 25% depreciation is based on "chart" they have
and the age of the boat. I say its bull to depreciate these two parts, the
prop shaft and the case. These parts don't normally wear out and certainly
mine weren't 25% gone. I say they have to use the actual amount of wear on
my parts, not some chart. The policy does not say anything about a chart.
The only word it uses is "depreciate" and there is no definition or other
explanation. Webster says depreciation means" A decline in the value of a
property due to general wear and tear." So absent any policy definition
that's the one that must apply. And that means they must show that MY unit,
and specifically the two parts in question, have suffered wear and tear. I
don't think they can show that. I told them they can inspect it at
anytime, which I believe is their legal duty as part of their duty to
fairly adjust this claim, but so far they have stonewalled me this, no
doubt because they want to avoid the cost of an inspection.

I would like to know if any of you have had an experience negoitiating with
BS over the depreciation issue, and if so what was the result. Thanks.

Let me see if I follow this tale accurately:

1) You hit something. Whose fault was that?

2) Shop takes an external look at the unit, utilizes X-Ray vision to declare
"everything inside is screwed up", and asks for $5000.

3) Boat/US says, "Not so fast, we'll pay for a tear down to see if everything
inside is screwed up, or not."

4) Following tear down, the $5000 shop reduces the scope of work required and
its estimate to $2700.

5) You concede that your policy states that mechanical items can be
depreciated.
(Note: At one time this wasn't the case with a "yacht" policy. People would
lose an engine at 2500 hours and expect the insurance company to fork out five
figures for a new one. That's changed recently in many policies. If your boat
is a total loss, you're going to get the agreed upon hull value, but other
types of repairs, particularly mechanical, are more often depreciated)

6. Your real beef seems to be with the method of calculating depreciation. At
25%, you probably got off light. I've heard of other insurance companies going
for 40-50% on stuff that's not more than 1-2 years old.

BoatUS is one of the best insurance companies, IMO. They have been my insurer
for 12 or 13 years now. I'm glad my premiums don't reflect the cost of having
other policy holders "hit something" and
then walk away scot free.

In a year when there have been four hurricanes in the SE, nobody should expect
any insurance co. to be a fountain of generosity. This is a bad year for them,
and they will follow the policy language with a pretty hard nosed attitude.

How old was the drive?

Engines and such are, in my policy, considered "new" if they were either
majored or bought within the previous 5 years. Otherwise they are
depreciated.

--
--
Karl Denninger ) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net My home on the net - links to everything I do!
http://scubaforum.org Your UNCENSORED place to talk about DIVING!
http://www.spamcuda.net SPAM FREE mailboxes - FREE FOR A LIMITED TIME!
http://genesis3.blogspot.com Musings Of A Sentient Mind

In article ,
Gould 0738 wrote:

Let me see if I follow this tale accurately:

1) You hit something. Whose fault was that?

2) Shop takes an external look at the unit, utilizes X-Ray vision to declare
"everything inside is screwed up", and asks for $5000.

3) Boat/US says, "Not so fast, we'll pay for a tear down to see if everything
inside is screwed up, or not."

4) Following tear down, the $5000 shop reduces the scope of work required and
its estimate to $2700.

5) You concede that your policy states that mechanical items can be
depreciated.
(Note: At one time this wasn't the case with a "yacht" policy. People would
lose an engine at 2500 hours and expect the insurance company to fork out five
figures for a new one. That's changed recently in many policies. If your boat
is a total loss, you're going to get the agreed upon hull value, but other
types of repairs, particularly mechanical, are more often depreciated)

6. Your real beef seems to be with the method of calculating depreciation. At
25%, you probably got off light. I've heard of other insurance companies going
for 40-50% on stuff that's not more than 1-2 years old.

BoatUS is one of the best insurance companies, IMO. They have been my insurer
for 12 or 13 years now. I'm glad my premiums don't reflect the cost of having
other policy holders "hit something" and
then walk away scot free.

In a year when there have been four hurricanes in the SE, nobody should expect
any insurance co. to be a fountain of generosity. This is a bad year for them,
and they will follow the policy language with a pretty hard nosed attitude.

(Gould 0738) wrote in
:

Let me see if I follow this tale accurately:

1) You hit something. Whose fault was that?

Who cares whose fault it was. Apparently you don't understand the nature
of property insurance. It covers me even if it was my fault, as long as I
wasn't grossly negligent (e.g. drunk), or did it on purpose. For the
record in this case, the obstruction was unmarked and uncharted and not in
a place you might suspect. Its what's called an "accident." And accidents
are exactly what insurance is for, even, believe it or not, if your are
negligent. Now of course if your insurance company thinks this negligence
is likley to continue, they will probably cancel you, but they have to pay
this claim. That's what I paid my premiums for.

Don't mind him.. I plonked him long ago.


Let me see if I follow this tale accurately:

1) You hit something. Whose fault was that?

Who cares whose fault it was. Apparently you don't understand the nature
of property insurance. It covers me even if it was my fault, as long as I
wasn't grossly negligent (e.g. drunk), or did it on purpose. For the
record in this case, the obstruction was unmarked and uncharted and not in
a place you might suspect. Its what's called an "accident." And accidents
are exactly what insurance is for, even, believe it or not, if your are
negligent. Now of course if your insurance company thinks this negligence
is likley to continue, they will probably cancel you, but they have to pay
this claim. That's what I paid my premiums for.

Who cares whose fault it was. Apparently you don't understand the nature
of property insurance.

I understand that the nature of property insurance is that its a written
contract between the insured and the carrier.

The time to read your policy is *before* you hit something, rather than after,
(and then howl about the details of the contract you signed).

The insurance company didn't come looking for you to turn you into a victim.
You hit something. They then performed as per the contract. Your specific
complaint is, what?

(Gould 0738) wrote in
:

Who cares whose fault it was. Apparently you don't understand the
nature of property insurance.

I understand that the nature of property insurance is that its a
written contract between the insured and the carrier.

The time to read your policy is *before* you hit something, rather
than after, (and then howl about the details of the contract you
signed).

The insurance company didn't come looking for you to turn you into a
victim. You hit something. They then performed as per the contract.
Your specific complaint is, what?

My specific complaint is that they aren't performing the contract as
written. I'm "howling" because I think they are making up new parts of the
contract that were never there. I have no problem with "depreciation."
Depreciation, as mentioned, means decline in value "due to wear and tear."
Absent something more in the contract, BoatUS can't simply assume there is
wear and tear based on the age of the part. We are NOT talking about the
market value of parts in question, we are taling about how much of their
useful life remains. What if I bought the boat and parked it for 10 years.
There would be absolutely no wear and tear on the prop shaft. My complaint
with BoatUS is that they simply assume wear and tear based on age without
even inspecting the part. My boat has very few hours and thus very little
wear and tear, so I believe they are depriving me the benefits of my
contract with them. The prop shaft by its nature has a very long useful
life (assuming you maintain the other parts) and certainly, the way I use
the boat, will last more than 15 years they assume in their chart. There
is nothing in the contract allowing them to use their own defintions and
assumptions. In fact,insurance law is exactly the opposite. If there is
any ambiguity in an insurance contract, the ambiguity is interpreted in
favor of the insured.

My specific complaint is that they aren't performing the contract as
written. I'm "howling" because I think they are making up new parts of the
contract that were never there. I have no problem with "depreciation."

Depreciation, as mentioned, means decline in value "due to wear and tear."


Just before the accident, you had perfectly serviceable, but "used" parts in
your outdrive. If the insurance company had replaced the parts with perfectly
serviceable parts out of a scrap outdrive, I would be faster to agree with your
feeling of ill use if your were asked to pay a sum that reflected the
difference in value between a new part and a used part. Difference aka
"depreciation." Difference between the value of something new and the same
thing used.

It was absolutely the correct move, IMO, to
put in the brand new parts during the repair. Even a perfectly serviceable used
part can be somewhat worn down, and all other things being equal a used part is
probably more likely to fail more quickly.

Absent something more in the contract, BoatUS can't simply assume there is
wear and tear based on the age of the part. We are NOT talking about the
market value of parts in question, we are taling about how much of their
useful life remains. What if I bought the boat and parked it for 10 years.

Did you park the boat for ten years? Was it new, or slightly worn out when you
bought it? When Boat/US insured the boat, I would assume that they inquired
about the number of engine hours. Were there additional hours
on the machinery at the time of the accident?



There would be absolutely no wear and tear on the prop shaft. My complaint
with BoatUS is that they simply assume wear and tear based on age without
even inspecting the part.

If you want to dispute Boat/US findings or opinions, don't cash the settlement
check.
Call the adjuster and get the name of one of the mechanical surveyors that
Boat/US
trusts in your area, and see if the adjuster will agree to examine the parts.

In fact,insurance law is exactly the opposite. If there is
any ambiguity in an insurance contract, the ambiguity is interpreted in
favor of the insured.

But don't expect the insurance company to bend over backwards to pay you more
than they think they can get away with.

It may take some negotiation to bring them around.

The good news is that they paid for the tear down, right?

There are a lot of insurance companies who don't pay for tear down or
"diagnosis" at all.

I replaced an engine within the last year.
Boat/US insurance. They were very fair.
Didn't cover much, (my policy didn't lead me to expect much, either) but they
spent about $500 tracking down the cause of the failure (bad solder joint in
the turbo aftercooler) and would have stepped up to the plate if the cause had
been a covered item.

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:20:32 GMT, akheel
wrote:

I had the exact same thing happen to me this summer, but my insurance
company is Progressive. They bought me a new lower unit (Bravo III),
reconditioned my props, and replaced the clutch "just in case."
Because the boat ('99 Crownline 225) looked well taken care of and had
only 150 hrs they did not depreciate it ($5,500 bill).

Although it was a collision and i was of course the only party
involved, they say they did not fault me because the obstruction was
not marked on the chart. I had to pay my $1,000 deductible - ouch,
but my own fault, less $200 credit for the nosecone on the old case.

Progressive was an absolute joy to work with from start to finish.
All the guys who work at the marina have switched because they say
Progressive handles every claim like this.

I've heard some pretty good tings about prgoressive. Probably won't go with
Boatus after this review.


"Slambram" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:20:32 GMT, akheel
wrote:

I had the exact same thing happen to me this summer, but my insurance
company is Progressive. They bought me a new lower unit (Bravo III),
reconditioned my props, and replaced the clutch "just in case."
Because the boat ('99 Crownline 225) looked well taken care of and had
only 150 hrs they did not depreciate it ($5,500 bill).

Although it was a collision and i was of course the only party
involved, they say they did not fault me because the obstruction was
not marked on the chart. I had to pay my $1,000 deductible - ouch,
but my own fault, less $200 credit for the nosecone on the old case.

Progressive was an absolute joy to work with from start to finish.
All the guys who work at the marina have switched because they say
Progressive handles every claim like this.