I have BOATUS insurance and recently was invovled in an accident the my
insurance company (BoatUS) told me that they would not pay for the entire
cost of repairs becuase some was due to wear and tear, eventhough i would
not have had it repaired if it wasn't for the accident. Basically a spring
broke and in order to repair it they had to replace the others becuase it
was unsafe to repair just one. They sent out a marine surveyor and after
that I recieved a check for 1/4 of the repair amount.. Basically my
question is has anyone had the similar situation? Or, is there a way to
complain and/or talk with someone higher about the claim / settlement??? If
so, how should i approach the situation??? any help is apprecaited... this
is my first accident and encounter with the insurance company.

Thanks!!

It is not unusual for an insurance company to depreciate the value of
the item being repaired or replaced. You would need to review your
policy to determine if that is allowed in your case.

The first action you can take is to question the valuation with your
agent. They may pass you on to a claims adjustor. An explanation of
the repair might get you a better assessment.

If you intend to challange the payout do NOT cash or deposit the check.
It may be taken as accepting the offer.

How far you go with the matter depends on the cost of the repair, what
your deductable is, wether you can find another insurance company if
they drop your coverage.

"ToneJohn" wrote in message

...... (BoatUS) told me that they would not pay for the entire cost of
repairs becuase some was due to wear and tear,

The easiest way to deal wth this is before it happens. I know that's no
help to you now, but my guess is that your current policy is written
stipulating replacement at ACV -- actual cash value. This is what gives the
carrier the right to depreciate the payout.

In future, make sure your policy is written such that three important
factors are addressed. The policy should stipulate, right from the start,
an *agreed value* for the vessel; should effect repairs/replacements at
*replacement cost*; and should cover *all risks*. This way, all the tough
questions are resolved before the damage occurs, so no one has the wiggle
room to try to tap-dance out of their responsibilities. This type of policy
will cost a bit more, but will avoid the kind of hassle you're having right
now. There are lots of boats sitting on the hard because their owners can't
afford their portion of required repairs -- all because they tried to save a
couple hundred on their insurance premium.

John Gaquin wrote:
"ToneJohn" wrote in message

...... (BoatUS) told me that they would not pay for the entire cost of
repairs becuase some was due to wear and tear,

The easiest way to deal wth this is before it happens. I know that's no
help to you now, but my guess is that your current policy is written
stipulating replacement at ACV -- actual cash value. This is what gives the
carrier the right to depreciate the payout.

In future, make sure your policy is written such that three important
factors are addressed. The policy should stipulate, right from the start,
an *agreed value* for the vessel; should effect repairs/replacements at
*replacement cost*; and should cover *all risks*. This way, all the tough
questions are resolved before the damage occurs, so no one has the wiggle
room to try to tap-dance out of their responsibilities. This type of policy
will cost a bit more, but will avoid the kind of hassle you're having right
now. There are lots of boats sitting on the hard because their owners can't
afford their portion of required repairs -- all because they tried to save a
couple hundred on their insurance premium.

Good luck finding a policy these days that doesn't consider wear and
tear on machinery. The old days of putting 2000 hours on an engine,
over 20 years, and then geting a "freebie" from the insurance company
when the old mill goes toes up are long gone.

Even policies that are "agreed value" on hull, etc, commonly depreciate
engines, gearboxes, etc. Boat US being a specific example.

There is a difference between a risk that is insured against, such as
storm damage or striking a rock, and expecting to be reimbursed because
something with a specific useful life finally reached the end of it.

It isn't uncommon for an insurance company to pay for repairs to
engines, etc, when the loss is due to accidental damage, but in this
case it sounds like the springs (valve springs?) are worn out to the
point where the first one has broken and the others may not be far
behind.

wrote:
John Gaquin wrote:
"ToneJohn" wrote in message

...... (BoatUS) told me that they would not pay for the entire cost of
repairs becuase some was due to wear and tear,

The easiest way to deal wth this is before it happens. I know that's no
help to you now, but my guess is that your current policy is written
stipulating replacement at ACV -- actual cash value. This is what gives the
carrier the right to depreciate the payout.

In future, make sure your policy is written such that three important
factors are addressed. The policy should stipulate, right from the start,
an *agreed value* for the vessel; should effect repairs/replacements at
*replacement cost*; and should cover *all risks*. This way, all the tough
questions are resolved before the damage occurs, so no one has the wiggle
room to try to tap-dance out of their responsibilities. This type of policy
will cost a bit more, but will avoid the kind of hassle you're having right
now. There are lots of boats sitting on the hard because their owners can't
afford their portion of required repairs -- all because they tried to save a
couple hundred on their insurance premium.

Good luck finding a policy these days that doesn't consider wear and
tear on machinery. The old days of putting 2000 hours on an engine,
over 20 years, and then geting a "freebie" from the insurance company
when the old mill goes toes up are long gone.

Even policies that are "agreed value" on hull, etc, commonly depreciate
engines, gearboxes, etc. Boat US being a specific example.

There is a difference between a risk that is insured against, such as
storm damage or striking a rock, and expecting to be reimbursed because
something with a specific useful life finally reached the end of it.

It isn't uncommon for an insurance company to pay for repairs to
engines, etc, when the loss is due to accidental damage, but in this
case it sounds like the springs (valve springs?) are worn out to the
point where the first one has broken and the others may not be far
behind.

The first thing you do is hire your own investegator, a surveyor, to
represent you. If he concludes that the problem was not wear and tear,
send your report from him in to the insurance company and indicate to
the person you are dealing with that you are not accepting the
settelment. By the way, in most states you can simply write on the back
of the check "In dispute", this indicates that in cashing the check you
do not agree that this is a final settelment. Also, make it very clear
to them that you are not going to fade away, ask to talk to their boss,
call them every day, talk to your state insurance department, then,
talk to a lawyer, if the amount is worth it. I chased an insurance
company for two years on a claim (a good one), they finally gave me
what I wanted, just to get rid of me and my lawyer (who was a friend
and didn't charge me).

wrote in message

Good luck finding a policy these days.....

You may well be right. Having never had to file a claim I can't confirm or
deny the reality. But..... when I have asked the right, specific questions
of my agent, he has given me what I considered to be the right answers, in
writing. In my view, that's as good as you can get without actually
trashing your boat by way of experimentation.

John Gaquin wrote:
wrote in message
Good luck finding a policy these days.....

You may well be right. Having never had to file a claim I can't confirm or
deny the reality. But..... when I have asked the right, specific questions
of my agent, he has given me what I considered to be the right answers, in
writing. In my view, that's as good as you can get without actually
trashing your boat by way of experimentation.



Not every insurance company is out to screw you after a claim. I've not
had a boat claim ever, and I haven't had a serious car claim for about
35 years, and *that* one wasn't my fault. I have had three minor car
claims that had no impact on my policies or rates, because I wasn't at
fault.

We've got a claim pending now on our homeowners because of last week's
electrical storm. The claims agent called me yesterday and after I
explained the damages, she said to just send in the receipts, and she'd
waive half the $500 deductible. I don't know whether the fact that I
called the insurance company right after the storm and told it I had to
remove a tree to protect the house bought me any good graces, but had
the tree fallen on the house, which it was threatening to do, the
insurance company would have been out tens of thousands of dollars or more.

The last insurance dispute I had that was like this was with someone
else's insurance that didn't want to pay replacement cost for an older
car that just had the engine and transmission replaced (receipts
provided for complete engine rebuild and transmission replacement -
cheap shadetree job actually) within 1500 miles of the event. A semi
trailer decided to drive over the hood of my car - thus making it
impossible to repair, and impossible to find a replacement car with the
same qualities as the car that was damaged.

Here's how I fixed the issue - we're not talking about 10's of
thousands of dollars in my case - I filed a case against them in court
for the entire cost of repairing the vehicle as estimated by repair
shops in my area + rental car. They settled with me to avoid the
expense of going to court - total cost to them was under 5 grand (more
than I asked for to begin with though, and definitely more than the
$250 that they wanted to give me).

They argued with me many times during this process. They assured me
that they would win. And I assured them that I obviously have no money
to lose by going forward and would enjoy the opportunity to see what
the judge said. I believe that the eventually realized that there was
a remote possiblity that they would have to pay somewhere near what I
was asking + court costs + legal fees + publicity issues in my small
town. With only a few grand on the line, they folded and paid up after
about 2 weeks of harrassing me and threatening me with retribution
(like I cared - I was broke and ticked... court would have been
entertainment for me at this point).

Yup. When my Datsun Roadster was run over(rear-ended) by a jacked-up,
big tired F250, their insurance totaled it and offered me $1500.00. I
just hinted that I was considering suing the driver for reckless
endangerment for not paying attention when behind a vulnerable little
convertible sports car in that truck, and also noted I could have sold
it on Ebay for $6K before the accident. They coughed up the $6K
promptly, and made me sign a release promising not to sue them.
JR

Arcadefreaque wrote:
The last insurance dispute I had that was like this was with someone
else's insurance that didn't want to pay replacement cost for an older
car that just had the engine and transmission replaced (receipts
provided for complete engine rebuild and transmission replacement -
cheap shadetree job actually) within 1500 miles of the event. A semi
trailer decided to drive over the hood of my car - thus making it
impossible to repair, and impossible to find a replacement car with the
same qualities as the car that was damaged.

Here's how I fixed the issue - we're not talking about 10's of
thousands of dollars in my case - I filed a case against them in court
for the entire cost of repairing the vehicle as estimated by repair
shops in my area + rental car. They settled with me to avoid the
expense of going to court - total cost to them was under 5 grand (more
than I asked for to begin with though, and definitely more than the
$250 that they wanted to give me).

They argued with me many times during this process. They assured me
that they would win. And I assured them that I obviously have no money
to lose by going forward and would enjoy the opportunity to see what
the judge said. I believe that the eventually realized that there was
a remote possiblity that they would have to pay somewhere near what I
was asking + court costs + legal fees + publicity issues in my small
town. With only a few grand on the line, they folded and paid up after
about 2 weeks of harrassing me and threatening me with retribution
(like I cared - I was broke and ticked... court would have been
entertainment for me at this point).



--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth

"ToneJohn" wrote in
:

I have BOATUS insurance and recently was invovled in an accident the
my insurance company (BoatUS) told me that they would not pay for the
entire cost of repairs becuase some was due to wear and tear,
eventhough i would not have had it repaired if it wasn't for the
accident. Basically a spring broke and in order to repair it they had
to replace the others becuase it was unsafe to repair just one. They
sent out a marine surveyor and after that I recieved a check for 1/4
of the repair amount.. Basically my question is has anyone had the
similar situation? Or, is there a way to complain and/or talk with
someone higher about the claim / settlement??? If so, how should i
approach the situation??? any help is apprecaited... this is my first
accident and encounter with the insurance company.

Thanks!!






I am going to offer you something very unusual on this newsgroup: advice
addressing your specific question based on actual relevant experience.

I too have a BOATUS policy. I too had an accident. I too had the
experience of being offered the depreciated amount. Well, here's your bad
news. If you read your policy, there's a 99.9% chance you will find a
clause that allows BOATUS to pay the depreciated value of mechanical, if
not all, parts on your boat. They know it's there and that's why they
offered you the depreciated value. You signed up for it, and you should
live with it.

But now, a little hope for you: I fought them, and I won. Maybe cause I
was right, or maybe cause I wore them down. First, do or confirm
everything in writing. Just the fact that you do that let's them know
you're no rube and that a record is being created which they can't deny
later. Second, and most important, you need a ground to challenge their
offer. I my case, and I believe what may be your only chance, I
challenged their assesment of depreciation. My policy, and probably yours
(read it, every word) allowed depreciation, but never defined it. The
dictionary defines it as a decline in value due to wear and tear. Look it
up. The key here is wear and tear, NOT age. In my case, BOATUS kept
insisting that a bent prop shaft on my boat had a useful life of I think
10 years (I can't really remember right now, but it doesn't matter, the
principle is still the same)and that since it was half that old, they
ought to pay half the value. There was nothing in the policy that said
that this was the correct method of depreication. It was "just our rules
sir." Well I don't give a damn about their rules, and neither should you.
The only thing that counts is your insurance contract. My argument, which
I believe to be legally correct, is that they had to base any
depreciation on ACTUAL wear and tear, not just an estimate based on age
and their arbitrary assesment of useful life, and that in my case,
because of the meticulous care I had shown the boat, including no salt
water ever, there was virtually no wear and tear on the prop shaft and
that it would certainly last more than another 5 years, probably
indefinately. Remember, its the depreciation on the actual part in
question, not the assembly of which its a part. So in my case, sure, the
outdrive may blow out someday, but it's unlikey that the propshaft will
wear out if properly cared for. I kept writing letters, and eventually
they settled for a small deduction.

Now in your case, they have sent a surveyor. Did the surveyor determine
the actual wear and tear and remaining useful life on the part they want
to depreciate, or did he estimate by age alone? If so, there are your
grounds to fight them. If the surveyor did determine the actual wear and
tear, you could still fight by challenging his findings. Of course you
would fare much better if you get an independent surveyor or mechanic to
back you up. If you are right, do not give up. It may take five or six
letters and many phone calls. Also, it doesn't hurt to mention the
Insurance Commissioner in your state. Good luck.