Boaty Insurance Requirments - kill cord

[PeterM]

A quick post to let everyone know that more and more insurers are now introducing the requirment for the KC to be worn in order for the insurance to be valid.

While they are doing this (I think) purely to protect thier financial interest I feel it may one of the few ways that people will start to take this more seriously (especially on the back of the recent incidents we are aware of)

We all know the boats not covered for theft without a clamp & engine secured to boat etc - so we all are paranoid about making sure we use them - and it works .

Hopefully as this requirment for the kill cord to be worn becomes more common it will have same result as the clamps etc.

Pete

PS - I'd add this isn't in every policy at present ( but have seen on Towergate & N&G) - but dont be surprised if you see it come in at renewal.

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by PeterM

A quick post to let everyone know that more and more insurers are now introducing the requirment for the KC to be worn in order for the insurance to be valid.

While they are doing this (I think) purely to protect thier financial interest I feel it may one of the few ways that people will start to take this more seriously (especially on the back of the recent incidents we are aware of)

We all know the boats not covered for theft without a clamp & engine secured to boat etc - so we all are paranoid about making sure we use them - and it works .

Hopefully as this requirment for the kill cord to be worn becomes more common it will have same result as the clamps etc.

Pete

PS - I'd add this isn't in every policy at present ( but have seen on Towergate & N&G) - but dont be surprised if you see it come in at renewal.

A mahoosive can 'o worms methinks. Another excuse not to pay out

[kerny]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

A mahoosive can 'o worms methinks. Another excuse not to pay out

Seconded.

[jambo]

Originally Posted by kerny

Seconded.

Thirded plus


Sent from my iPhone using RIB Net

[Poly]

Originally Posted by PeterM

A quick post to let everyone know that more and more insurers are now introducing the requirment for the KC to be worn in order for the insurance to be valid.

This is surely a really bad idea.

We all know the boats not covered for theft without a clamp & engine secured to boat etc - so we all are paranoid about making sure we use them - and it works .

Are we ALL? I see a lot of trailers without clamps - uninsured, acceptable risk, not aware of the policy details, lazy/forgot? Perhaps its different on the south coast where thefts are more prevalent. However its the policy holder who gets stung in that case. In this case the "victim" may well be an innocent 3rd party. How would we feel if can insurance said it wouldn't pay out (to 3rd parties) if the driver was shown to be speeding at the time of the accident?

[PeterM]

OK - so then lets ( a collective nation) not bother trying to get people to wear them at all - thats a much better to makeboating safe .

Cars are legally requireds to be insured - boats aren't thats a big differance - if your clever enough to insure then you're clever enough to wear a KC.

If you dont insure - it wont matter .

Sometimes the attitudes of the posters on this site do my nut in ....

[Doug_G]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

A mahoosive can 'o worms methinks. Another excuse not to pay out

How does one prove that one was wearing the KC(s) at the time of the incident?

Further how does the insurance co prove that one was NOT wearing the KC(s) at the time of the incident?

[PeterM]

Originally Posted by Doug_G

How does one prove that one was wearing the KC(s) at the time of the incident?

Further how does the insurance co prove that one was NOT wearing the KC(s) at the time of the incident?

The bits of bodies and blood in the water are a give away ?

or the videos on youtube / tv etc ?

the RNLI being called to deal with the chaos & mess ?

[boristhebold]

The insurance companies have many many many ways of not paying out as the majority of boat owners dont have a clue. Strong words ? maybe but take any typical day in the summer in pool harbour and you will find endless examples of the following;

not wearing kill cord
not wearing life jacket
kids sitting on bow of small boats at speed
boats on wrong side of channels going out of port and coming into port
fishing in the middle of a channel in day and at night
night time no lights
alcohol
speeding
boats going under bridges when lights are red
boats going under bridges either side of the stated transit route
boats watersking within boundary of exclauion limit nr beaches
jet skis - enough said

and if you think about it a typical example would be 99% of say 80 boats in studland at anchor not displaying an anchor ball.

while some above are connected with local byelaws and colregs I am aware that some arnt legislated against, the majority are covered.

So add that lot above to issues of not locking your trailer etc. I am surprised insurance companies every pay out.

Im personally done with the subject of boat safety, im doing my own thing in terms of safety and not worrying about others any more.

[willk]

Originally Posted by boristhebold

....Im personally done with the subject of boat safety, im doing my own thing in terms of safety and not worrying about others any more.

You too? I was on the water last night and a friend radioed to warn/tell me about rogue jetskiers at my landing place. He said they were driving dangerously, close to other vessels and swimmers and the pier, that they were drunk, no PFDs, falling off, having to be recovered by their mates. He was well lathered in a foam of Moral Indignation. I was like "but they're jetskiers J, get over them already!"

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by PeterM

.....the posters on this site do my nut in ....

You're doing a fine job by yerself, you don't need our help

[Poly]

Originally Posted by PeterM

OK - so then lets ( a collective nation) not bother trying to get people to wear them at all - thats a much better to makeboating safe .

by your own admission this is about protecting the insurer not protecting people. I don't think anyone said not bother. I don't recall anyone saying KC's were a bad idea, or even that its a bad idea to encourage their use.

Cars are legally requireds to be insured - boats aren't thats a big differance - if your clever enough to insure then you're clever enough to wear a KC.

the highest profile kill cord accident was with clever people with a high value boat. I'd suggest it was insured. They simply forgot to put the cord on. You seem pleased to here that a simple accident that someone forgets to do something will not be insured but does nothing to address those who are too stupid to insure in the first place.

The reason 3rd party insurance is not legally required at sea is, thankfully, third party losses from uninsured parties is a rare occurrence. From kill cord preventable accidents even more so. Making the insurance policy even less likely to pay out is not a good way to encourage everyone to be responsible and get insured.

Sometimes the attitudes of the posters on this site do my nut in ....

Do you ever stop to think when someone disagrees with you that their MIGHT be a deeper argument than the superficial conclusion you've jumped to?

If insurers wanted to improve safety they could. I'm sceptical about kill cord stickers - but they could include them in renewal notices - or even a leaflet with some gory pictures. They could even offer significant (rather than token) discounts for people with quals, or insist that there is someone trained on board at all times etc. In reality theft is probably more likely to be a payout for insurers hence why they've already developed their requirements/excuses in that area.

[willk]

Originally Posted by Poly

Do you ever stop to think when someone disagrees with you that their MIGHT be a deeper argument than the superficial conclusion you've jumped to?

I'd gentle up a bit IIWY P...

[PeterM]

Superb responses from the admins again

I'm going boating & flying in France this week - enjoy being admins sat behind a computer .....

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by PeterM

Superb responses from the admins again

I'm going boating & flying in France this week - enjoy being admins sat behind a computer .....

nah nah na nah nah, We used to say things like that in the playground too

PS, what IS the minimum age for a PPL?

[Poly]

Originally Posted by PeterM

Superb responses from the admins again

I'm going boating & flying in France this week - enjoy being admins sat behind a computer .....

[CJL]

Sad to say this will be a waste of time.

[John Kennett]

Originally Posted by PeterM

OK - so then lets ( a collective nation) not bother trying to get people to wear them at all - thats a much better to makeboating safe .



Cars are legally requireds to be insured - boats aren't thats a big differance - if your clever enough to insure then you're clever enough to wear a KC.



If you dont insure - it wont matter .



Sometimes the attitudes of the posters on this site do my nut in ....

I would hazard a guess that the majority of people who insure their boats are really only interested in theft or damage, with third perry liability only of minor interest as no one believes they are likely to cause an accident.

In this scenario it's perfectly reasonable to expect to find people self-interested enough to have insurance, but without the awareness or imagination to use a kill cord.

Would an insurer get away with not paying a third party claim because the insured wasn't using a kill cord anyway? Surely the main point of third party insurance is to cover the insured's incompetence or negligence?

I could see them declining to pay out for the insured's losses though.

[ShinyShoe]

Thought I'd take a gander at T&G's wording. It would certainly be possible to make the policy not cover the boat (or owner) for damage caused when KC not worn. I'm inclined to agree that third party causes an issue...

However, I discovered this page: Essential Safety Devices for RIBS | Towergate Insurance - it seems T&G don't think a KC is in the top 5 bits of safety kit! Its mentioned in "other". So lights and a compass are more important...!

The sample policy wording seems to be from 2011.

My craft is fitted with a 'kill cord', should I use it all the time?

Their FAQ does cover it...

My craft is fitted with a 'kill cord', should I use it all the time?
Yes. Your cover will be invalid if you fail to attach your kill cord. Occupants thrown from the craft can avoid serious injury if the engine can be cut.

Had a look at Zurich's example small craft policy documents on their website (N&G) - but can't see any sign of kill cords either.

Their risk management guide also seems to miss mentioning it.. http://www.zurich.co.uk/internet/hom...0500249008.pdf

That said... N&G have this general exclusion:
"wilful misconduct or acts of recklessness by you or other persons
in control of the Craft including, not limited to, conduct when under the
influence of alcohol or drugs"

I'd suggest failure to use a KC may be classed as reckless...

But I wouldn't want their policy anyway...

Exclusions for craft capable of > 20mph:
"theft of Craft whilst stored unless the
theft involves forcible and violent
entry or removal."

So someone comes and cuts my wheel lock off and drives my trailer and boat away but I'm not there to be exposed to voilence... so I'm not covered?

[AMac]

The money grabbing bastards are now saying that you must wear a KC good news
But they don't say what condition the switch has to be in ! They don't say to test it before leaving the dockside ?