"jps" wrote in message
Okay, I understand but the question remains. Why would my broker write
the policy for $50K "uninsured boater?" If someone were to get hurt,
$50K can get eaten up pretty fast...

The reason a broker would write that policy is it allowed him to give you a
low price, so you would buy the policy from him, allowing him to make his
commission. He did not do his job, and I would look for another insurance
agent and company.

In article Z6fNb.51451$5V2.66231@attbi_s53, says...
"jps" wrote in message
Okay, I understand but the question remains. Why would my broker write
the policy for $50K "uninsured boater?" If someone were to get hurt,
$50K can get eaten up pretty fast...

The reason a broker would write that policy is it allowed him to give you a
low price, so you would buy the policy from him, allowing him to make his
commission. He did not do his job, and I would look for another insurance
agent and company.

Well, that's not the case here because she had all the rest of my
insurance.

She's since left the firm so I'm going to get some recommendations from
friends and family for a new broker...

jps

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
jps wrote in message
.. .
My boat policy is about to renew and I thought I'd do a little
shopping
based on posts I've read about Boat US being a reasonable alternative.

Everything looked pretty much the same (including cost of coverage)
until I got to "uninsured boater" line. My present policy assumes
$50,000 and the Boat US is $300,000. I assume that if my vessel is a
total loss with someone else at fault, the max. payout with my present
policy is $50K (and the boat is worth significantly more).

I'm mystified why my broker would write the policy this way and
disappointed that I didn't see this previously.

Anyone have any insight? Is my broker shortsighted or what?

"Uninsured Boater" coverage does not cover your boat. The hull value
is covered by "Boat and Boating Equipment Coverage", which the Boat US
policy equivalent to Collision and Comprehensive on your car. Just
like if you're hit in your car by an uninsured driver - it's your
collision coverage that repairs your car, not your unisured motorist
coverage.

"Uninsured Boater" covers those damages for which the uninsured boater
may be liable to you, except your boat itself. It would cover, for
example, medical expenses for you if the uninsured other guy was at
fault in a collision.

Okay, I understand but the question remains. Why would my broker write
the policy for $50K "uninsured boater?" If someone were to get hurt,
$50K can get eaten up pretty fast...

Then your liability insurance kicks in. If someone other than the insured
is injured on your boat, it is your liability that works. If you are
injured by an uninsured boater / motorist then the uninsured motorist part
will pay the deductibles, etc from your health policies. And boat / car
damages upto the limits.

"Calif Bill" wrote in message link.net...
"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
jps wrote in message
.. .
My boat policy is about to renew and I thought I'd do a little
shopping
based on posts I've read about Boat US being a reasonable alternative.

Everything looked pretty much the same (including cost of coverage)
until I got to "uninsured boater" line. My present policy assumes
$50,000 and the Boat US is $300,000. I assume that if my vessel is a
total loss with someone else at fault, the max. payout with my present
policy is $50K (and the boat is worth significantly more).

I'm mystified why my broker would write the policy this way and
disappointed that I didn't see this previously.

Anyone have any insight? Is my broker shortsighted or what?

"Uninsured Boater" coverage does not cover your boat. The hull value
is covered by "Boat and Boating Equipment Coverage", which the Boat US
policy equivalent to Collision and Comprehensive on your car. Just
like if you're hit in your car by an uninsured driver - it's your
collision coverage that repairs your car, not your unisured motorist
coverage.

"Uninsured Boater" covers those damages for which the uninsured boater
may be liable to you, except your boat itself. It would cover, for
example, medical expenses for you if the uninsured other guy was at
fault in a collision.

Okay, I understand but the question remains. Why would my broker write
the policy for $50K "uninsured boater?" If someone were to get hurt,
$50K can get eaten up pretty fast...

Then your liability insurance kicks in. If someone other than the insured
is injured on your boat, it is your liability that works. If you are
injured by an uninsured boater / motorist then the uninsured motorist part
will pay the deductibles, etc from your health policies. And boat / car
damages upto the limits.

Not neccesarily. Liability coverage only covers you if you are found
negligent. If the accident was someone elses fault, your liability
coverage may not kick in at all. So the amount of "unisured boater"
coverage is something to consider.

And "unisured boater" coverage does not cover damage to your boat.
Your "boating and boating equipment" coverage would handle that.

"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
om...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
link.net...
"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
jps wrote in message
.. .
My boat policy is about to renew and I thought I'd do a little
shopping
based on posts I've read about Boat US being a reasonable
alternative.

Everything looked pretty much the same (including cost of
coverage)
until I got to "uninsured boater" line. My present policy assumes
$50,000 and the Boat US is $300,000. I assume that if my vessel
is a
total loss with someone else at fault, the max. payout with my
present
policy is $50K (and the boat is worth significantly more).

I'm mystified why my broker would write the policy this way and
disappointed that I didn't see this previously.

Anyone have any insight? Is my broker shortsighted or what?

"Uninsured Boater" coverage does not cover your boat. The hull
value
is covered by "Boat and Boating Equipment Coverage", which the Boat
US
policy equivalent to Collision and Comprehensive on your car. Just
like if you're hit in your car by an uninsured driver - it's your
collision coverage that repairs your car, not your unisured motorist
coverage.

"Uninsured Boater" covers those damages for which the uninsured
boater
may be liable to you, except your boat itself. It would cover, for
example, medical expenses for you if the uninsured other guy was at
fault in a collision.

Okay, I understand but the question remains. Why would my broker
write
the policy for $50K "uninsured boater?" If someone were to get hurt,
$50K can get eaten up pretty fast...

Then your liability insurance kicks in. If someone other than the
insured
is injured on your boat, it is your liability that works. If you are
injured by an uninsured boater / motorist then the uninsured motorist
part
will pay the deductibles, etc from your health policies. And boat / car
damages upto the limits.

Not neccesarily. Liability coverage only covers you if you are found
negligent. If the accident was someone elses fault, your liability
coverage may not kick in at all. So the amount of "unisured boater"
coverage is something to consider.

And "unisured boater" coverage does not cover damage to your boat.
Your "boating and boating equipment" coverage would handle that.

If the other person causes the accident and is uninsured, then is very
likely that your liability coverage is going to kick in, if anybody besides
you on your boat was injured.

jps wrote in message . ..
In article ,
says...
jps wrote in message .. .
My boat policy is about to renew and I thought I'd do a little shopping
based on posts I've read about Boat US being a reasonable alternative.

Everything looked pretty much the same (including cost of coverage)
until I got to "uninsured boater" line. My present policy assumes
$50,000 and the Boat US is $300,000. I assume that if my vessel is a
total loss with someone else at fault, the max. payout with my present
policy is $50K (and the boat is worth significantly more).

I'm mystified why my broker would write the policy this way and
disappointed that I didn't see this previously.

Anyone have any insight? Is my broker shortsighted or what?

"Uninsured Boater" coverage does not cover your boat. The hull value
is covered by "Boat and Boating Equipment Coverage", which the Boat US
policy equivalent to Collision and Comprehensive on your car. Just
like if you're hit in your car by an uninsured driver - it's your
collision coverage that repairs your car, not your unisured motorist
coverage.

"Uninsured Boater" covers those damages for which the uninsured boater
may be liable to you, except your boat itself. It would cover, for
example, medical expenses for you if the uninsured other guy was at
fault in a collision.

Okay, I understand but the question remains. Why would my broker write
the policy for $50K "uninsured boater?" If someone were to get hurt,
$50K can get eaten up pretty fast...

Okay. I just thought you felt that you didn't have enough "uninsured
boater" coverage based on the value of your boat. I was just pointing
out that they are really not related.

But you still have a good question. I would be guessing - it's
probably just a standard coverage level. What is "standard" often
differs from company to company.

An example of differing standards would be "spill liability" coverage.
With many boat policies that is part of your property damage
liability coverage. If you sink your boat (as a result of your
negligence or someone elses) or bust a tank in your slip and spill a
hundred gallons of diesel in the water, you can be liable for big $$$
in clean up costs. BOAT/US *yacht* policies have additional coverge
just for spills. It's $500K, even if you chose lower limits on other
liability. What does that have to do with "unisured boater"
coverage....?

....Just an example of how standards can be different.

Why did your broker only write $50K on your current unisured boater
coverage? Probably because it was typical coverage level. But
remember that *you* have a responsibility to think about your
coverage. If you didn't think that $50K was enough, you could've
asked for more. Then your broker probably would have explained the
coverage better than I could.

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 16:20:42 -0800, jps wrote:

My boat policy is about to renew and I thought I'd do a little shopping
based on posts I've read about Boat US being a reasonable alternative.

Everything looked pretty much the same (including cost of coverage)
until I got to "uninsured boater" line. My present policy assumes
$50,000 and the Boat US is $300,000. I assume that if my vessel is a
total loss with someone else at fault, the max. payout with my present
policy is $50K (and the boat is worth significantly more).

I'm mystified why my broker would write the policy this way and
disappointed that I didn't see this previously.

Anyone have any insight? Is my broker shortsighted or what?

My two boats are insured as part of the house/car/personal liability
package, both boats are insured for full replacement value (new) and
about a zillion dollars liability and under-insured boater. The full
replacement value trick insures that I will at least get what I paid
for the boats without any deduction.

The only thing I can say about BoatUS is that I know somebody who
placed a claim, non-total, and BoatUS dropped him like a hot potato.

Later,

Tom
S. Woodstock, CT
----------
"My rod and my reel - they comfort me."

St. Pete, 12 Lb. Test

My two boats are insured as part of the house/car/personal liability
package, both boats are insured for full replacement value (new) and
about a zillion dollars liability and under-insured boater. The full
replacement value trick insures that I will at least get what I paid
for the boats without any deduction.


Sounds like perhaps you're with Encompass, formerly known as CNA?

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:27:50 -0700, "RG" wrote:


My two boats are insured as part of the house/car/personal liability
package, both boats are insured for full replacement value (new) and
about a zillion dollars liability and under-insured boater. The full
replacement value trick insures that I will at least get what I paid
for the boats without any deduction.

Sounds like perhaps you're with Encompass, formerly known as CNA?

Used to be and they wrote a terrific policy - affordable too. The
current policies are a custom job done by an attorney for personal and
business reasons.

Later,

Tom
S. Woodstock, CT
----------
"My rod and my reel - they comfort me."

St. Pete, 12 Lb. Test

Sounds like perhaps you're with Encompass, formerly known as CNA?

Used to be and they wrote a terrific policy - affordable too. The
current policies are a custom job done by an attorney for personal and
business reasons.


I've been with CNA/Encompass for 13 years, using their USP Elite product,
and really like the concept of a single policy covering all property and
casualty risks, including excess liability. Very well written coverage.
Sounds like you've taken that concept even further with your custom package.
Good move.