I tore my genoa in my spreader Tip one year. My agent said he would split the difference with me less the deductible on a brand new sail . When it came time to pay he covered the cost less the deductible . My sail was 25 years old also . I think it's time for a new insurance company . I have the Skippers plan from a large local insurer here in Toronto that specializes in boats
Sent from Joe Bognar > On Dec 27, 2013, at 11:39 PM, "Peter Fell" <prf...@gmail.com> wrote: > > So a couple weeks before Christmas, a windstorm of 40 – 50 km/hr ripped apart > my 130 genoa overnight. It stayed furled on the boat but the top caught the > wind and peeled it down, ripping 3 panels across the leech / UV cover, > breaking the leech line, etc. No damage to the furler though ... I had that > checked out by a rigger. > > Local loft says $500 to fix the sail but the “designed shape has been > compromised and repairs will not bring the sail back to pre damage > condition”. That’s the loft manager’s wording verbatim. > > So far insurance underwriter has responded back to the adjuster that they are > willing only to ‘repair’ the sail, with the net result of me spending another > $250 (deductible) on essentially a ruined sail. The adjuster is going to try > again with a different approach. I’ll hear back in the new year on that. > > I’m not obviously happy with this, considering, although the sail is 10+ > years old, it was in pretty good condition (sailcloth and shape-wise) ... so > much so that it was deemed worth it to have $500 of re-stitching, new UV > cover, leach line, etc. done just over a year ago! > > Policy coverage is for depreciated value on sails and they will only cover > “reasonable cost of repairs actually incurred” for partial losses. Seems like > pretty crappy coverage given what they consider ‘reasonable’ repairs. > > I think my loft manager needs to be a bit more descriptive in their wording > as well. > > A new sail has been quoted from the loft at $2,500. Of course adding a new > sail won’t allow me to increase the insured value of my boat either ... since > it would not be a new equipment addition to the boat ... just a replacement. > A little loophole I discovered earlier this fall when I asked about this > regarding my newly rebuilt engine ... since it is not a new addition and > most of the cost was in labour and replacing existing parts ... no value > increase was deemed possible. > > OK, I’ve finished my rant! Anyone have any suggestions? > > Peter Fell > Sidney, BC > 1979 C&C 27 MkIII > > > _______________________________________________ > This List is provided by the C&C Photo Album > http://www.cncphotoalbum.com > CnC-List@cnc-list.com
_______________________________________________ This List is provided by the C&C Photo Album http://www.cncphotoalbum.com CnC-List@cnc-list.com
