Liability Issue

Head Sail · Nov 5, 2017

thetone said:
I will need to obtain a survey and an estimate to have him write a letter to this insurance company. This will cost me some money with no guarantee of relief.

Welcome to the US justice system. The insurance company knows it will cost you more to collect than the damages which make them scumbags but you can still tell the owner of the other boat about their decision. If he doesn’t make it right you may have an option in small claims court to recover some or all of the damage. Unfortunately, the situation will make for uncomfortable diners at the yacht club.

dlochner · Nov 5, 2017

The other boat owner's insurance company probably has an "act of God" clause that they are invoking. For such a small amount, $4500 most attorneys won't get too involved, they won't make any money. You'd have to pursue it through small claims court and demonstrate that they should have paid.

Good Luck. Keep us posted.

dlochner · Nov 5, 2017

jviss said:
The other owner should do the honorable thing, pay the damages, and he can seek relief from his own insurance company, or whoever owns or maintains his mooring.

Why? If the mooring was inspected and the powers to be declared it an adequate mooring, then the owner is not necessarily at fault and should have no liability. This is why you should carry your own insurance policy and not just liability. Your insurance pays the claim and then they decide if it worthwhile subrogate the claim.

If you can show that the other boat owner was somehow negligent, then you might well have a claim.

Head Sail · Nov 5, 2017

dlochner said:
Why? If the mooring was inspected and the powers to be declared it an adequate mooring, then the owner is not necessarily at fault and should have no liability.

Because the inspection proved to be inadequate. Inspection doesn’t absolve the owner of damage his boat causes if it breaks loose. The purpose of the inspection is to reduce the likelihood the mooring will fail not guaranteed it won’t fail.

dlochner · Nov 5, 2017

jviss said:
Otherwise this thing will end up in court, or the injured party will just fix his own boat and suck it up.

This is what you have to do when you only carry liability insurance. In essence you agree to pay for any damage that you cause to your boat or by an act of God. Was the damage caused by a Named Storm? Some policies have special rules for damage caused by Named Storms.

Head Sail · Nov 5, 2017

dlochner said:
This is what you have to do when you only carry liability insurance. In essence you agree to pay for any damage that you cause to your boat or by an act of God.

An argument should be made the damage was caused by the other boat not an “act of God”.

Rick486 · Nov 5, 2017

This seems like when an automobile is damaged by an uninsured motorist and the owner of the damaged vehicle has only liability insurance. Sure you save money on your insurance but in so doing you self insure against this type of occurrence. This is how the system works.

Head Sail · Nov 5, 2017

Rick486 said:
This seems like when an automobile is damaged by an uninsured motorist and the owner of the damaged vehicle has only liability insurance.

No, it is not the same as an uninsured motorist because the other party has insurance but is refusing to pay.
The insurance company’s obligation is to the other boat owner who needs to make a claim on his policy...not you.

dlochner · Nov 5, 2017

Head Sail said:
An argument should be made the damage was caused by the other boat not an “act of God”.

The argument would be that the mooring was in good shape, adequately sized, and no part of the mooring chain, pendant etc failed. The mooring broke free from the bottom due to the wave action and tidal surge caused by the storm. No one could have reasonably predicted the out come nor have reasonably prevented it, therefore it is an "Act of God" and we're not liable for the consequences of an "Act of God."

If some part of the mooring failed, the chain broke, a shackle failed etc. then a case might be made that it was inadequate inspection and maintenance caused the boat to break free and damage other boats. We don't know whether those facts might be in play or not.

I don't want to seem insensitive to the OP plight. It sucks to have your boat damaged. Been there done that, had my boat blow off the jack stands in a storm to the tune of $15K in damage. I had made the choice (with the bank's influence) to carry damage insurance, so I only paid a small deductible. My boat was the first domino, with 2 other boats coming off their jack stands. To the best of my knowledge they did not file a claim against my insurance. If they did, my insurance company didn't tell me.

dlochner · Nov 5, 2017

Rick486 said:
This seems like when an automobile is damaged by an uninsured motorist and the owner of the damaged vehicle has only liability insurance. Sure you save money on your insurance but in so doing you self insure against this type of occurrence. This is how the system works.

Not exactly, Uninsured Motorist covers damage caused by someone who doesn't have insurance on the vehicle he is driving. It could be because the UM never purchased insurance, it may be the UM borrowed a car and the car owner's insurance doesn't allow for lending car, or it could be a stolen car.

A better example is Comprehensive insurance. Comprehensive insurance covers damages caused by something other than a motor vehicle accident; Hail damage, falling trees, deer running into road, errant baseballs, rocks kicked up by a truck on a highway. Comprehensive, at least in NY, is optional (unless the finance company requires it), if you choose to not have comprehensive insurance you will save a few bucks, until that buck runs out in front of you.

dlochner · Nov 5, 2017

jviss said:
You are constructing a narrative based on facts not in evidence. What storm? OP said "recent gale."
I'd say it's certainly actionable, and remind folks that insurance law and regulation and custom are not uniform nor always logical, and yacht insurance not at all like automobile.

You know, instead of taking statements out of context and then attacking them, you might want to consider the entire statement. If you go back and read the entire post you will note:

dlochner said:
The argument would be that the mooring was in good shape, adequately sized, and no part of the mooring chain, pendant etc failed. The mooring broke free from the bottom due to the wave action and tidal surge caused by the storm. No one could have reasonably predicted the out come nor have reasonably prevented it, therefore it is an "Act of God" and we're not liable for the consequences of an "Act of God."

If some part of the mooring failed, the chain broke, a shackle failed etc. then a case might be made that it was inadequate inspection and maintenance caused the boat to break free and damage other boats. We don't know whether those facts might be in play or not.

Head Sail · Nov 5, 2017

dlochner said:
The argument would be that the mooring was in good shape, adequately sized, and no part of the mooring chain, pendant etc failed. The mooring broke free from the bottom due to the wave action and tidal surge caused by the storm.

Maybe, maybe not...we don't know for sure but the damage to the OP's boat was directly caused by the other boat, not wave action. Nature doesn't put boats on inadequate moorings.

Head Sail · Nov 5, 2017

thetone said:
All things said I believe the mooring failed in some way. The insurance company said that' not a factor since their insured had it inspected. I disagre.

Contact the boat owner and ask him to make a claim. The insurance company represents him not you. The story may change.

dlochner · Nov 5, 2017

Head Sail said:
Maybe, maybe not...we don't know for sure but the damage to the OP's boat was directly caused by the other boat, not wave action. Nature doesn't put boats on inadequate moorings.

There are lots of facts we don't know, so we are necessarily speculating. The argument I made was a suggestion of how the insurance company might respond. The proximal cause of the damage is of course the other boat. But the boat and its owner did nothing negligent to cause the damage, the boat became a free agent once the mooring failed. The insurance company will argue that the root cause of the accident is the weather conditions, an Act of God.

Perhaps the standards for the mooring are inadequate, perhaps, this was a "100 year" gale and was a rare weather event, who knows. To determine that would require considerable research and testimony from experts, who for the most part we are not.

In the grand scale of things, $4.5K is a pretty small amount of money. Paying for the expert testimony and the lawyers to counter the insurance company is going to cost more than $4.5K. The insurance company might pay some or all of the damages just to cut their losses.

Head Sail · Nov 5, 2017

thetone said:
All things said I believe the mooring failed in some way. The insurance company said that' not a factor since their insured had it inspected. I disagre.

Who owns the mooring? If it was the mooring that failed, you should ask the owner of the mooring to file a claim. If the boat was not secured to the mooring properly, the boat owner should file the claim.

Liability Issue

.

.

Attachments

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.