On 21 May 2006 16:45:37 -0700, "Fog Dog" wrote:

For the last 15 years or so I have entertained customer's and fellow
employees on my boat. I have recently decided to take a trip from the
Chesapeake to NYC and my company has offered to cover the fuel expense
if I were to make myself and the boat available for employee and
customer outings while there.

In the past I have asked my insurance providers if I would be covered
under these circumstances. They always indicated that provided that I
was not a charter and I made no profit from the expense reimbursement I
would be covered.

I have just been told by a Boat U.S. insurance underwriter that if I
were reimbursed by the company for fuel expense only that this is
considered business use and I would not be covered.

I know literally scores of people who do this regularly and have done
so for years. My question is:

Can this be correct? Are there other insurance companies that have a
more realistic definition of business use? Are there any suggestions
for getting around this?

It sounds like you are, in fact, chartering the boat to the company for the
cost of fuel. I'd want your company to provide liability insurance also.

In fact, I just wouldn't do it.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************