Twodogs - you have proved my point exactly. If the boat that dragged had a transponder on it the incident may never have happened!! The owner could have come down to his boat or called water police and stopped it happening.

Of course a transponder is not going to be of any use when you are underway. I agree. It cant stop you making blunders or unfortunate accidents. And if you cant afford to cover possible damage insurance can be worthwhile. If they pay up.

Here are 3 examples why they were recently fitted: Boatie 1 - shore power failed so batteries died and fridge failed. When the fridge failed the bait melted and flooded saloon carpet and filled the bilge with gunk that became foul and rotten. $3000 damage. Now that boatie knows immediately his shore power fails and can go fix it. Boatie 2- Timber boat came of mooring drifted onto shore in Sydney city with huge expensive hull damage.. Boat was ransacked because it was there all next day and he didnt know. Now he knows if boat comes of mooring. Boatie 3- His boat is at Hamilton Island but he is in Sydney right now. He got invoiced for maintenance on his boat up there but down here he knew no one went on his boat. He avoided being ripped off by one of the maritime sharks. The shark when questioned suddenly remembered it was a different boat that was maintained and cancelled the invoice. Yeh right!!!

For me and many, there's no way not knowing where our boats are or whats happening on board when not there makes us better off.

MB I would like to advertise on SB, thats a good suggestion but since the box is highly relevant to the SB members in this forum (many have one) by helping avoid insurance claims I think its valid to mention it here.

Imo, for what it's worth, both of this measures are very useful.

The TrekTransponder is preventative, to warn the owner , something untoward is happening to the yacht, act! act! act!, if you can.

The insurance is a follow up measure, ensuring to fix the damage if the owner was not able to act!

Those two measures are necessary and perhaps compulsory - in case of a visit to a Marina - protections.

While one could live without one, could not live without the other.
However, the best protection would be to have both.

twodogs1969 said..
How would a transponder on my boat have told me his boat was moving?

I am not saying for some what your transponder covers may not be worth while.

However what I am pointing out and I think morning bird is also is it does not cover some of the expensive things insurance will.

Not your boat his boat!!

So then as I said the claim was deemed to be a no fault claim and each of us had to claim on our own insurance.
I don't Agee it is a no fault claim as his mooring obviously was not big enough to hold him.
My side of the claim was $25000 and the transponder would not have helped. That is 25 years of premiums.

Trek said..

twodogs1969 said..
So then as I said the claim was deemed to be a no fault claim and each of us had to claim on our own insurance.
I don't Agee it is a no fault claim as his mooring obviously was not big enough to hold him.
My side of the claim was $25000 and the transponder would not have helped. That is 25 years of premiums.

Twodogs I think you miss the point. I agree it was his fault or whoever is supposed to maintain his mooring. Ive got gouge marks in my boat from stray boats that pranged into it so believe me I know.

But if he had a transponder on his boat he would have known his boat was moving and could have fixed the problem before impact. My transponder is used by a boat marina in Vanuatu for that EXACT purpose. At Gladesville Bridge Marina where I was for years they promoted my transponder at their office because they thought it was such a huge risk reduction device and a number of boaties got one. Same in Pittwater where I am now. Its often been purchased to use as a remote anchor watch while the crew are ashore. If the anchor drags the skipper knows.

A transponder on his boat WOULD have prevented the accident unless he couldnt or wouldnt do something

I totally comprehend what you are saying.
However I think you maybe missing my point.

1. His insurance did not cover my damage insurance companies deemed it a no fault claim. My policy had to pay for the repairs to my vessel $25000.

2. For your theory of him having a transponder so I can rely on that.
Means I am putting my faith in every other owner to have a transponder and care enough as well as being able to rectify what ever the situation is. You have a lot more faith in other owners than I do.


As morning bird and I said a transponder may be a good thing and give you some peace of mind. However it will not protect your boat from dissmasting or another vessel hitting you, not a sinking from hitting something. How many well maintained boat's sink at the mooring? How many who have a mooring serviced annually break free. In a storm like April 2 years ago when my boat was dammage winds were 70+ knts police and marine rescue are not going to be worried about a boat that has broken its mooring heading for shore . If you decide to fix it yourself are you going to get there in time in your dinghy with a 2hp on the back?

The point is it does not replace having what is to me a fairly large investment insured.

As a long time worker in this field, just remember that thinking "it must be his fault, his boat hit mine" and enforceable legal liability are different . Take advice before spending time and money.

Just to illustrate, what if some idiot decided it would be funny to cut the other boat free - no fault on the owner.

Cheers

Bristle

twodogs1969 said..

Trek said..

twodogs1969 said..

Trek said..

twodogs1969 said..
So then as I said the claim was deemed to be a no fault claim and each of us had to claim on our own insurance.
I don't Agee it is a no fault claim as his mooring obviously was not big enough to hold him.
My side of the claim was $25000 and the transponder would not have helped. That is 25 years of premiums.

Twodogs I think you miss the point. I agree it was his fault or whoever is supposed to maintain his mooring. Ive got gouge marks in my boat from stray boats that pranged into it so believe me I know.

But if he had a transponder on his boat he would have known his boat was moving and could have fixed the problem before impact. My transponder is used by a boat marina in Vanuatu for that EXACT purpose. At Gladesville Bridge Marina where I was for years they promoted my transponder at their office because they thought it was such a huge risk reduction device and a number of boaties got one. Same in Pittwater where I am now. Its often been purchased to use as a remote anchor watch while the crew are ashore. If the anchor drags the skipper knows.

A transponder on his boat WOULD have prevented the accident unless he couldnt or wouldnt do something

I totally comprehend what you are saying.
However I think you maybe missing my point.

1. His insurance did not cover my damage insurance companies deemed it a no fault claim. My policy had to pay for the repairs to my vessel $25000.

2. For your theory of him having a transponder so I can rely on that.
Means I am putting my faith in every other owner to have a transponder and care enough as well as being able to rectify what ever the situation is. You have a lot more faith in other owners than I do.


As morning bird and I said a transponder may be a good thing and give you some peace of mind. However it will not protect your boat from dissmasting or another vessel hitting you, not a sinking from hitting something. How many well maintained boat's sink at the mooring? How many who have a mooring serviced annually break free. In a storm like April 2 years ago when my boat was dammage winds were 70+ knts police and marine rescue are not going to be worried about a boat that has broken its mooring heading for shore . If you decide to fix it yourself are you going to get there in time in your dinghy with a 2hp on the back?

The point is it does not replace having what is to me a fairly large investment insured.

I think we are on the same page.
Out of interest who deemed it to be a "no fault" claim" ? You dont need deep pockets to get paid for damage some else did. Just fill in the forms and go to court your self. The opposing party is then forced to show up and prove it wasnt his fault and if he doesnt you win and get paid. I know, Ive done it.

my Insurance Company and his Deemed it a No Fault Claim.
I am amazed how it could be as he dragged his mooring . It didn't break and only stopped when hooking up to mine si mine held both boats.
How's he not at fault he clearly had to small a mooring for his boat.

I would need deep pockets I was taking on an insurance company.

It would certainly be worth asking your insurer why they considered it a no-fault claim. They have deep pockets and access to plenty of legal advice when it comes to recovering money so they don't normally give up without a reason.

Just to correct a point previously made. The other party doesn't have to show up and prove it wasn't their fault. You have to show that, on the balance of probabilities, they are legally liable. For example, if they provide a recent, competent surveyors report showing that their mooring is adequate, they may have discharged their duty of care and you'd have to start again going after the surveyor.

Alternatively you can win and find that the other guy has no assets to pay up.

Just warning that it can take a while and be complex - I did hundreds during my working life.

I'd be really interested to know if they do let you have the reason.

Best of luck

Bristol

Agent nods said..
Just a guess...since you now had to claim on your own insurance, you now have a claim registered in your name. Which generally means insurance companies can now increase your premiums.

That is right.
They said it was an act of god .
I we wereboth on a Comercial mooring I actually hold the marina at fault. I complained to everyone I could in the insurance company to no avail. I even had David Bray my broker trying to help but no good.
My story was to point out that if you have a boat worth more than a couple of thousand third-party insurance and thinking that if someone else hits you you will be right is wrong. I have got my monies worth out of insurance to warrant having full insurance.

twodogs1969 said..

Trek said..

twodogs1969 said..

Trek said..

twodogs1969 said..
So then as I said the claim was deemed to be a no fault claim and each of us had to claim on our own insurance.
I don't Agee it is a no fault claim as his mooring obviously was not big enough to hold him.
My side of the claim was $25000 and the transponder would not have helped. That is 25 years of premiums.

Twodogs I think you miss the point. I agree it was his fault or whoever is supposed to maintain his mooring. Ive got gouge marks in my boat from stray boats that pranged into it so believe me I know.

But if he had a transponder on his boat he would have known his boat was moving and could have fixed the problem before impact. My transponder is used by a boat marina in Vanuatu for that EXACT purpose. At Gladesville Bridge Marina where I was for years they promoted my transponder at their office because they thought it was such a huge risk reduction device and a number of boaties got one. Same in Pittwater where I am now. Its often been purchased to use as a remote anchor watch while the crew are ashore. If the anchor drags the skipper knows.

A transponder on his boat WOULD have prevented the accident unless he couldnt or wouldnt do something

I totally comprehend what you are saying.
However I think you maybe missing my point.

1. His insurance did not cover my damage insurance companies deemed it a no fault claim. My policy had to pay for the repairs to my vessel $25000.

2. For your theory of him having a transponder so I can rely on that.
Means I am putting my faith in every other owner to have a transponder and care enough as well as being able to rectify what ever the situation is. You have a lot more faith in other owners than I do.


As morning bird and I said a transponder may be a good thing and give you some peace of mind. However it will not protect your boat from dissmasting or another vessel hitting you, not a sinking from hitting something. How many well maintained boat's sink at the mooring? How many who have a mooring serviced annually break free. In a storm like April 2 years ago when my boat was dammage winds were 70+ knts police and marine rescue are not going to be worried about a boat that has broken its mooring heading for shore . If you decide to fix it yourself are you going to get there in time in your dinghy with a 2hp on the back?

The point is it does not replace having what is to me a fairly large investment insured.

I think we are on the same page.
Out of interest who deemed it to be a "no fault" claim" ? You dont need deep pockets to get paid for damage some else did. Just fill in the forms and go to court your self. The opposing party is then forced to show up and prove it wasnt his fault and if he doesnt you win and get paid. I know, Ive done it.

my Insurance Company and his Deemed it a No Fault Claim.
I am amazed how it could be as he dragged his mooring . It didn't break and only stopped when hooking up to mine si mine held both boats.
How's he not at fault he clearly had to small a mooring for his boat.

I would need deep pockets I was taking on an insurance company.

I dont want to nag on about the point and be a pain but as an example I sued an airline and won. Me and my cheap suburban lawyer. No matter how big the company they still have to show up in the courthouse and prove they are right. In the case of me versus the airline they sent three lawyers, the magistrate heard their side, then my side, then threw the book at them :-) I won. I did the same once with the predecessor of Telstra which used to be Telecom. Not only did Telecom get found liable and we won hands down I got a profuse written apology from their management at the time who blamed the matter on junior legal staff.

So you can sue a big company and win.

Like Bristol said getting advice is wise to make sure you don't make a blunder and get your claim thrown out and if they don't have any money there's no use winning. But maybe Bristol can answer this - I found that in most cases I heard of if the defending party doesn't show up the court reserves the right to make a decision in their absence that generally goes against them. So wouldnt twodogs have a good chance? Let us know Bristol!

I have been trying to get insurance but have been unable to find anyone to cover a boat kept on anchor in a creek. The insurance is more for any damage I might cause other boats by dragging my anchor. If anyone knows of any company that would cover a anchored boat that isn't a live aboard please tell me.
I have a 15kg rocna out the front and a 15 kg bruce out the back and both have 25m 8mm chain 4m water sandy bottom. I didn't move during cyclone debbie (agnes water not the full force further north still 70 knot winds) so must be doing something right.

survey, survey , survey , survey. thats all im getting.

Youi most certainly do cover boats on swing moorings in tassie any way

Sectorsteve said..

Capt_Newmo said..
Youi seems popular
Quoted $550 swing mooring full comprehensive, $2000 excess for a boat of $25000.
Thats for a CAV 32

they have no clue. After asking me thousand questions , 30 min on phone they then said youi dont cover boats on a swing mooring. I hate insurance. its a scam. Everyone involved with insurance is a scammer and they're all scratching each other backs making money out of the ether. Ill just have to do what ive always done. be bloody careful and have to avoid the QLD marinas. Or better yet get my graphics mate to make me a policy.

Not only QLD marinas

Sectorsteve said..
survey, survey , survey , survey. thats all im getting.

I just insured with Pantaenius. No survey requested but it could be on a case by case basis.

One downside was they requested full year premium in advance or a huge markup for quarterly payment. So I decided to pay the first quarter while I scrape together the money to pay for 12 months before the next quarterly bill comes. The particulars of the quote were:

--Swing mooring
--$40k for hull, $5k for motor
--No racing
--Australian waters only
--No single handed offshore sailing after sunset and before sunrise
--Does not cover wear and tear
--Named tropical storms not covered
--$2500 excess
--$979 premium (paying annually) or $1128 paying quarterly

The one thing that caught my eye in the quote is this one:

Personal Accident Insurance:
Death = $45k per person
Permanent Disablement = $90k per person

This seems low?? If I kill someone and they only give the family $45k that doesnt seem right.... At that rate I could afford to kill a few people before they lock me up

Hope this helps

FelixdeCat said..

Sectorsteve said..
survey, survey , survey , survey. thats all im getting.

I just insured with Pantaenius. No survey requested but it could be on a case by case basis.

One downside was they requested full year premium in advance or a huge markup for quarterly payment. So I decided to pay the first quarter while I scrape together the money to pay for 12 months before the next quarterly bill comes. The particulars of the quote were:

--Swing mooring
--$40k for hull, $5k for motor
--No racing
--Australian waters only
--No single handed offshore sailing after sunset and before sunrise
--Does not cover wear and tear
--Named tropical storms not covered
--$2500 excess
--$979 premium (paying annually) or $1128 paying quarterly

The one thing that caught my eye in the quote is this one:

Personal Accident Insurance:
Death = $45k per person
Permanent Disablement = $90k per person

This seems low?? If I kill someone and they only give the family $45k that doesnt seem right.... At that rate I could afford to kill a few people before they lock me up

Hope this helps

The Personal Accident insurance is for you and anyone else as specified i.e. possibly your crew and is a "no fault" cover. If you injure someone else and are legally liable, that's under your third party cover to the limit of liability, often $10 million. On my Club Marine policy, the personal accident cover only applies to the "named insured" but this may vary.

So if you injure/kill someone they can get well in excess of $45k

Cheers

Bristle