# Liability for damage during a storm?



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

Hello,
I haven’t had a chance to poke around this forum yet, but I was hoping someone could give me some advice about my chances of getting anything back for the damage my sailboat sustained last night.
I have a rare 1969 Severn 20 sailboat, (hull #6 of 100 made) which WAS in good condition. Last night a storm came through Lake Nockamixon and my boat was seriously damaged along the rub-rail on both sides.
The stern line on neighbors boat broke and the boats banged together causing twice as much damage on my boat than his. I feel his boat was not secured properly. The stern line was probably frayed as a result of it rubbing against the dock because he was not using a spring line on the other side of the stern.
I would like to prove that the other boat owner was negligent in not having his boat properly tied up. I have plenty of photos. Based on the information I offered so far, would I be right?
Assuming the other party doesn’t have insurance (I don’t), do I have a good legal base to sue the other party? I hope it doesn’t come to that, in fact I’m ready to sell the boat at a substantial loss at this point. 
How do courts rule in cases like this when there was a storm involved and someone’s dock line breaks?
Thanks in advance for any advice.


----------



## CalebD (Jan 11, 2008)

Sounds to me like you have a case. It is all about taking measures to manage your boat in a reasonably sea worth fashion to ensure that your boat does not damage others property. Would an extra spring line on your neighbor's boat have been a reasonable precaution? No doubt. Would it have been reasonable for you to hang a fender between your boats? Perhaps. It would have been especially 'reasonable' for you to go down to your boat to check on it knowing that there was a storm approaching.
I hope your neighbor has insurance as it is my guess that you would be awarded at least half the amount of damages by his insurance.
Get a repair estimate. The damage does not sound as if the boat cannot be saved. Better yet, post some pictures of the damage and you will get plenty of advice about fixing it.
Sorry for your loss and good luck.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

I'd say you have a good argument. Your neighbors boat hit yours and caused damage. It should be their responsibility no matter what the cause. 

If a powerboat makes a wake near a marina they are responsible for any damage that the wake may cause. If your cars rolls down your driveway and hits the car across the street, it is your fault weather you had the parking break set or not....


----------



## NOLAsailing (Sep 10, 2006)

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if the severity of the storm was atypical, then you'll have a hard time making a case against your slip neighbors. If your boat is the only one damaged, then maybe, but it's likely it will be blamed on the storm rather than your neighbors poor job of securing his boat.

Good luck.


----------



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

If the storm wasn't some unforseen catastrophic event, then it was one of those unpleasant but expected bursts of weather that a vessel is supposed to be moored strongly enough to resist. Yours did, his didn't, and nothing failed except his stern line. Seems like valid grounds for a claim.

You may want to get insurance in the future (though sometimes the cost for old classic boats is prohibitive or coverage unavailable), then recovery against the other boat would be your underwriters' problem and not yours.


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

Thanks for your advice and comments. That storm must have come out of nowhere. All I knew is that it rained last night. I had intentions of enjoying a beautiful day with 13+ mph breeze when I discovered the damage today. I spoke to the Park Ranger who saw it and he agreed that the other boat should have been secured better.

Well, I've owned this boat for over 18 years and I really had some wild times with it! I figured if I lost it at this point, I would have gotten my use out of it. That's why I didn't insure it.

I'll be working on getting some photos posted

Thanks!


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

NOLAsailing said:


> I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if the severity of the storm was atypical, then you'll have a hard time making a case against your slip neighbors. If your boat is the only one damaged, then maybe, but it's likely it will be blamed on the storm rather than your neighbors poor job of securing his boat.
> 
> Good luck.


As boaters we should secure our boats for the atypical storm, and I think that's what we all can expect of our neighbors. Atypical is an tricky word - a storm that didn't seriously damage the docks themselves wouldn't seem so severe, certainly not in the serious storm category - a hurricane does its damage by carrying away the floats, or lifting boats over the pilings. I would expect the other boater to cover any repair costs, and hopeully with out a lawsuit. (Several years ago I found my stern rail bent. Noticing a bent fluke on the anchor of the Hunter 34 on the next mooring over, I asked the owner if the two had a relationship. He admitted hitting my boat, but thought there was no damage, and agreed to pay the $900 for a replacement rail out of his pocket.)


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

I won't be able to show photos until I have 10 posts.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

whitewater7 said:


> I won't be able to show photos until I have 10 posts.


Goto the song chain in off-topic and post up 6 of the worst songs you ever heard


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

artbyjody said:


> Goto the song chain in off-topic and post up 6 of the worst songs you ever heard


Thanks...(I always leave the room when I hear that YMCA song!!)

Anyway, as far as the damage goes, when I sit inside the boat, I can see daylight for about 6' where the deck joins the hull, and the area that a the rub rail attaches to is smashed up too. That requires some upside down fiberglass work, or fabricating some sort of mold or mount, right?

The damage is to both sides of the boat about mid-ship.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Sounds like with pictures, you could take him to small claims court and win. Suggest you call him and ask him if he has insurance and if so...to notify them that his boat hit you and to contact you for a survey of the damage. 
If he does not have insurance...tell him you will get a quote for the work and that you expect to be compensated since his boat caused the damage. If he objects...then you can bring him to small claims.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Cam-

From the description, it may be more than a small claims court case can go for. In many states the limit is $5000 or less.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

You could be right dawg...but I figured $5k for a repair on a 40 year old 20' boat probably would cover most damage. I am NOT familiar with the boat...would love to see a picture of better days too Whitewater!


----------



## CalebD (Jan 11, 2008)

*It is probably fixable.*

Whitewater7,

First of all this was not catastrophic event as in a hurricane, flood or earth quake. It was a predicted storm that had some nasty effects so the owner should have kept his boat in the best reasonably docked status he could. He did not.

2) Keep posting to this thread until you get to the point where you can upload pictures.

3) If you can see that much water through your hull you need some serious repair work. I would cut out some fiberglass heavy cloth and epoxy it in place using a 5 min. epoxy and pins to hold it in place. Then I would start coating it with regular marine epoxy and adding layers of cloth as I built it up. For the outside of the hull above water (freeboard) I would use some 1/8" plywood (poplar, luan or whatever) to create a mold as you have suggested. You will have to get creative about making clamps that will hold the mold in place. As it turns out, wood is still cheaper than fiberglass so you can make your mold from wood.

4) I am assuming that your boat is made out of plastic, aka; fiberglass, FRP, GRP etc. Get the West System how to manual about using their product. http://www.defender.com/product.jsp?path=-1|9489|145953&id=805686

5) You are in some ways lucky that you were un-insured (if you can fix your boat up with monies that are coming your way) as insurers will condemn a boat as a complete and total loss (CTL) if the damage reaches above about half of the boats value. Once you place a claim they will then own your vessel and all the equipment on board if they condemn it as a CTL. In this case you will have to buy it back from them and they will write a check for the amount of the policy minus the amount you paid to buy it back. If your boat neighbor has insurance this could be important to you.

6) It is not that difficult to repair these kind of damage. You will learn a lot in the process. Pictures would help, so keep posting.


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

camaraderie said:


> Sounds like with pictures, you could take him to small claims court and win. Suggest you call him and ask him if he has insurance and if so...to notify them that his boat hit you and to contact you for a survey of the damage.
> If he does not have insurance...tell him you will get a quote for the work and that you expect to be compensated since his boat caused the damage. If he objects...then you can bring him to small claims.


That's what I intend to do. By small claims you mean up to $500 damage?
I don't know what fiberglass guys charge, but I would think the cost would exceed $500...I'm taking the boat out of the water tommorow, and will try to get some quotes...

Thanks


----------



## mentalfee (Jul 11, 2001)

> Well, I've owned this boat for over 18 years and I really had some wild times with it! I figured if I lost it at this point, I would have gotten my use out of it. That's why I didn't insure it.


I am not sure I understand. The boat is not worth insuring and you feel you have gotten your use of it but.... it is perfectly acceptable to sue another boater who had some bad luck. I must be missing something...

Many marinas require insurace before slip rental is allowed.

This may be a great time to make a new friend. Have him pick up the repair materials and you both do the work together with knowledged learned and shared form this site.


----------



## CalebD (Jan 11, 2008)

Mentalfee,

What is the difference between self insurance and brand name marine insurance? If someone damages your property (be it floating or on land), why are they not liable for damages caused by their property? 

Perhaps you are right though and it is a "time to make a new friend" and have him help you with the repair. I sincerely doubt that and I don't want someone's half a$$ed attempts at repairing my boat when I can do it better.

Perhaps I disagree.


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

mentalfee said:


> I am not sure I understand. The boat is not worth insuring and you feel you have gotten your use of it but.... it is perfectly acceptable to sue another boater who had some bad luck. I must be missing something...
> 
> Many marinas require insurace before slip rental is allowed.
> 
> This may be a great time to make a new friend. Have him pick up the repair materials and you both do the work together with knowledged learned and shared form this site.


That's a nice thought, but why should I bite the bullet for this persons negligence?

I am not going to rake this guy over the coals, and I am not the court room type either..

Our (PA) State run marina does not require insurance. I met my neighbors parents down there today. They told me he only paid $2K for his boat.

It's hard to place a value on my boat due to it's rarity, but odd boats genarally aren't generally worth much. I doubt if I could sell it for $3K with the motor, and that was before the damage.


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

*Photos*

Has anybody ever seen another Severn 20?
This photo was taken in 1992. We both got heavier&#8230;








THE DAMAGE
My boat is on the right;








Port Side








Inside Starboard








Inside port (not as bad)


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

CalebD said:


> Whitewater7,
> 
> First of all this was not catastrophic event as in a hurricane, flood or earth quake. It was a predicted storm that had some nasty effects so the owner should have kept his boat in the best reasonably docked status he could. He did not.
> 
> ...


CalebD....thanks for your reply. What kind of pins am I going to use to hold that 5 minute epoxy in place?

THNXS!!


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Whitewater...small claims court lets you go up to $5000 bucks without a lawyer. You should be able to recover the full amount of the damage repair cost if you win BUT the boat may not be worth what the repair will cost. Hope you have pictures of HIS boat in YOUR slip...otherwise it will be tough to prove fault. Hopefully you can just give him the quote and collect a check without the court deal.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Umm... that's not damage to the rubrail. Those photos basically show that he destroyed the hull-deck join, which is not a simple repair on most boats. Chances are more than good that that repair job, done properly, is more than a couple of grand. 

As Cam said, you do need photos of his boat and the way it was secured.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

MOst surveyors do insurance work, I would contact one in your area. State explicitly during the conversation that you want a insurance claim valuation. It'll probably run $250-400 bucks. He can tell you what a insurance company will most likely do in this case as insurance companies typically follow lead on surveyors recommendations. 

You can use that survey to negotiate with the boatyard a fixed cost for repair. If you go in with no insurance or valuation of what the cost of repairs should be, you'll be TMI for sure and from the looks of it the damage for owner paid and no counter insurance will be in the 5-8K easily. 

Above said advice is for you dealing with his insurance company, or if you are trying to validate whether the boat is worth the cost of repairs, or if the owner of the other boat has no insurance but is willing to pay for the repairs.

Best wishes...


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

I think it is pretty safe to assume that the other guy likely doesn't have insurance. He has a boat that he only paid 2k for and is in a public state owned/run marina that doesn't require insurance. It's not going to happen. If he only paid 2k for his own boat, how much do you think he is going to be willing to pay for someone elses boat? (Or have the ability to pay for that matter.) 

I think you are going to have to approach they guy with the problem and see what he is willing to do, but I think you are likely going to be doing the repair yourself on a shoestring budget. Jody- I think your idea is sound in reguard to the survey, but only if you can get it done pretty cheap. The Surveyor may not cost as much if they are only looking specificly at the damage. I can't see spending 10% of the value of the boat for the survey alone, before the repair is even started.

Just my $.02


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Based on the photo's, SD has it - cost to repair exceeds value of the boat (other than sentimental value), if the repair is done professionally. If the boat is done as a DIY project it becomes a larger issue of doing it correctly as it does indeed appear to be the hull deck join that is broken. Structual integrity has been compromised. 
Not a deal breaker, just saying.

As to the legal issues, talk to the marina managers, read your contract with the marina - I'd be willing to bet that all the info you need is right there. Your slip rental agreement most likely has words detailing your responsibility to fix /compensate for damage your boat causes, so will his, end of story until it comes time to collection.


----------



## SEMIJim (Jun 9, 2007)

sailingfool said:


> (Several years ago I found my stern rail bent. Noticing a bent fluke on the anchor of the Hunter 34 on the next mooring over, I asked the owner if the two had a relationship. He admitted hitting my boat, but thought there was no damage, and agreed to pay the $900 for a replacement rail out of his pocket.)


Coincidentally, we had nearly the same thing happen to our boat last season (anchor meets pushpit rail). Only in our case the other boat owner called us, told us about the damage and had even already researched repair options. He apologized profusely and volunteered right off to pay for whatever repair option we chose. Luckily, for him, I did further research and found a place that claimed they could make it better than before it was damaged (they did, too!) for less than our neighbour's lowest estimate.

Jim


----------



## MIKEMCKEE (Oct 13, 2001)

First, you should have had insurance, if the boat was rare enough to make it stand out. 
Go to your marinia office and I will bet you, there is a statement in the slip contract saying that each boat owner is responsible for damages their boat might cause if it isn't moored right and with forethought to possible storms that can come up this time of year.

Good Luck,

Chief
s/v Blue Bayou


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

If I had a more expensive boat, yes, I would have insurance. Now that this situation happened, I see the need for insurance, just in case I ever get sued.

On the way back from the marina today, I was lucky to get an estimate on the fly at a local boat dealer. An official written estimate costs $115, their hourly rate (they were nice to not charge me).

Roughly, the repair which includes a replacement rub-rail will take about 15-20 hours labor; $1795-$2300. That's about what the boat is worth (without the motor)

Thanks for your help. I'll let you guys know what happens.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

whitewater7 said:


> Roughly, the repair which includes a replacement rub-rail will take about 15-20 hours labor; $1795-$2300. That's about what the boat is worth (without the motor)


Keep in mind an estimate is just an estimate - and usually designed to just get you in the door. Actual bill will most likely differ, as they start to tear things apart and discover other issues. Having been a appraiser for a shop - you are looking at a much higher out the door bill of 5-8K IMHO.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Whitewater-

I would question that quote...since that may be for a rub rail replacement, but not for rebuilding the fiberglass sections of the hull and deck, and then rebuilding the hull-deck join and replacing the rub rail on the hull-deck join.

Also, what are the parts and materials costs going to be for the repair. If it is going to be 15-20 hours of labor... that is $1725-2300 and doesn't really leave anything for PARTS.



whitewater7 said:


> If I had a more expensive boat, yes, I would have insurance. Now that this situation happened, I see the need for insurance, just in case I ever get sued.
> 
> On the way back from the marina today, I was lucky to get an estimate on the fly at a local boat dealer. An official written estimate costs $115, their hourly rate (they were nice to not charge me).
> 
> ...


----------



## Duckwheat (May 6, 2008)

*boat damage*

Sounds like an Act of God. Big storms happen and boats get damaged, it happens. You are going to prove that his boat did "more" damage to you boat, HOW? What percentage did your boat incur on it's own? How are you going to determine that?

You have an old boat in "good shape". From an insurance settlement perspective old boats in good shape do not have much $ value.

How much are you talking about? You could easily find an attorney to take a lame case if you are willing to front the dollars. But what are you going to net out. Definitely an alienated neighbor. The reputation along the docks of being an .............

Fix the boat if it is that important to you.

DW


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

An act of God?..It looks like some negligence helped this occurance.
Not having a springline on the other side contributed to the break too.
It wasn't fastened to the dock properly and look at how it is attached to his boat:








His stern line wouln't have frayed and broke if he had a springline.


----------



## Duckwheat (May 6, 2008)

*incompetent vs. negligent.......*

So you get your day in court and everyone is riveted to your discussion of springline deployment.......................... If we took all the incompetent people out of boats where would we be then.... Be all the room in the world at the dock now. That would be my defense, incompetence. You have to know what you are doing to be negligent. He can plead stupidity.

If you are looking for some sympathy, you got a fair amount of it. I just read the original post and all the replys and thought to my self you got to be kidding. You need more in your life to occupy yourself than taking pictures of frayed rope and comiserating about your neigbor's boating incompetence.

Get over it. Sell the boat and get something else if the sight of it is going to upset you about the injustice of incompetent neighbors, big unexpected storms, and boats that go bump in the night.

I recall a client I had when I was in the insurance business. Someone had put a glass on his $40,000 dinner table and it left a ring. He wanted the table replaced. We offerred to fix it. "He could not live knowing when he had guest that the table was repaired". You don't have a brother in Denver?

DW


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Duckwheat-

There's a big difference... the OP doesn't want his boat replaced... just repaired. If this happened to your boat, and you didn't have insurance, I'm pretty sure that you'd be looking at the owner of the other boat to make good the damage to your boat.


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

Duckwheat, those pictures will come in handy to prove my point. I'm lucky I have time to chase down all of this stuff.

No other boats on the marina were damaged that night.

Your comparison of a water stained table top doesn't have a corellation here.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

WW7...The estimate you got was WAY low...you have significant hull deck damage...not rub rail replacement. Your damage exceeds the value of the boat. You will most likely get the value of the boat if you go to court and win but you will need to document the repair cost...spend the $115...and also document the value of your boat. 
Have you talked to the other boat owner yet?


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

I spoke to him tonight. He's a nice guy and said it's his first boat.
He does have insurance; he mentioned a $1K deductible.

I hope I can convince his insurance company (Erie) to help me out.
What do you think my chances are of them giving me some money, considering my lack of insurance?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Hmm... you're probably going to need to get a surveyor out to do a full survey of the damage, since it is more than the rubrail. Just from the limited photos you've posted previously, it is pretty obvious that there is damage to the deck, the hull, the hull deck join on the starboard side... the damage on the port side, which you mention in passing, is probably related, due to your boat getting hit and bashed into the finger pier. There are probably other structural problems from this as well.

I seriously doubt that the starboard side damage alone can be repaired for what you were quoted, even if you went with the high-end estimate.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

You should be able to provide the insurance company with a bill for repair estimate of $5k or so and a valuation of the boat...and get a check for the value of the boat. I don't think your neighbors $1k deductible applies to YOUR damage as that is liability coverage. He will be out that much for his own repairs. If the insurance company tells you "no" just tell them you are taking him to small claims court for the amount of repair and lost time on your boat and slip fees while being repaired. They won't like that..nor will they want to send a lawyer which is more expensive than the claim. You will get your $$.


----------



## Duckwheat (May 6, 2008)

*deductible..*

The deductible does not apply. It only applies to damage to his boat. The damage to your boat would be under his liability coverage.

The insurance company may give you a few hundred if they think it would make you go away. If they do not get that feeling they will probably tell you to take a hike. Then it is up to you to sue them.

Good luck.

DW


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

*An update*

I explained what happened to the other persons insurance company (Erie), and was told a claims adjuster would call me. It's been over a week, and they didn't call. I was hoping they would assess the damage without me having to tow the boat around to get official estimates.

I explained what happened to my insurance company (State Farm). I was told that since I have home owners insurance, I would have liability coverage if someone gets hurt on my boat AND up to $1000 coverage in the event of a "peril". My insurance company's agent said that they couldn't help me because my boat was damaged by the other person's boat!

The other insurance company says they don't cover damage caused by a storm.

So it seems that both insurance company's are dropping the ball, so to speak. Shouldn't the insurance companies be working this out between themselves, instead of me?

Happy Holiday weekend everybody! 
Fortunately, I have a canoe, and will be out on the water too!


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

*Shouldn't the insurance companies be working this out between themselves, instead of me?

*They have worked it out and decided that they are not responsible to pay you anything. 
You next move is to take the OWNER to small claims court for the amount of damages. You will win with the proper evidence and then HE can fight with his insurance company over what they owe HIM. 
BW...I've never heard of an insurance policy that denies liability for damage to someone else's boat based on the weather except in a NAMED storm. I think that is BS. But it doesn't really matter to you. Just sue the owner.


----------



## NOLAsailing (Sep 10, 2006)

Before suing the owner, you need to make a reasonable effort to get this amicably resolved. The court will look for that in making their determination. When I posted on the front end of this thread, I was thinking this was a major storm that tossed a lot of boats around. In viewing your photo of his dockline, though, and based on your statement that the only boat damaged is yours, I agree with you that the neighbor is culpable. 

I would write a letter that identifies the issues (politely) and makes a clear statement of what your looking for. Keep just to the bare facts - storm came, his boat was inadequately secured, his boat damaged your boat. Also, don't just say you want your boat repaired. Have a repair estimate from a local yard and make a provision for unforeseen costs.

Suggest that he utilize his insurance company and give him a reasonable amount of time to respond (5 or 7 days). If he doesn't, sue him.


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

I just checked my mailbox and did recieve a letter from Erie. They want to talk to me. At least I know the ball is rolling.

Thanks for your advice and comments. I've never sued anybody before, so your opinions have been very re-assuring. I'll let you know about the final outcome.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Yeah...keep us posted as this is interesting WW...also...follow Jason's advice rather than my short "sue him" advice as that should really be the last step and he should be given a chance to pay himself before dragging him to court. I was just thinking that if HIS insurance company is giving him a hard time then he may NEED you to sue him so he has proof of his liability in the case. Good luck!


----------



## jgeissinger (Feb 25, 2002)

*Insurance and boat damage*

I realize I am getting in to this a week late, but I would like to offer some advice if you have not proceeded with some other action. Essentially, your problem is that you didn't bother to adequately insure your own property against damage. You apparently have only a homeowners policy, which as you said provides liability coverage and some small amount of property damage. Since the other party's insurance company knows that you don't have your boat properly insured, they will probably ignore you. Doesn't your marina require some sort of minimum coverages and proof of insurance? I really don't want to sound like a jerk here, but I think you may possibly be out of luck. I hope not for your sake, but in the future if you have anything you can't afford to lose, get it insured.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Jgeissinger-

*How does whitewater's lack of adequate insurance mitigate the other boater's responsibility to properly tie up his boat and secure it for a storm???? Just curious as to what bassackwards thinking comes up with that logic. *


----------



## jgeissinger (Feb 25, 2002)

*Insurance*

Sailingdog, it is very simple. If he had adequate coverage, his insurance would have repaired his boat and then decided, by communicating with other insurance carrier, whether there was liability on the part of the other boat owner. At that time his company could try to recover the damages from the other party. The point is that this would all be done by the insurance companies. All he would have to do is get his boat repaired, and not go through all this hassle. Also, there's really no need to yell.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

Duckwheat said:


> So you get your day in court and everyone is riveted to your discussion of springline deployment.......................... If we took all the incompetent people out of boats where would we be then.... Be all the room in the world at the dock now. That would be my defense, incompetence. You have to know what you are doing to be negligent. He can plead stupidity.
> 
> If you are looking for some sympathy, you got a fair amount of it. I just read the original post and all the replys and thought to my self you got to be kidding. You need more in your life to occupy yourself than taking pictures of frayed rope and comiserating about your neigbor's boating incompetence.
> 
> ...


Duck, I gave you Pos reps for your first post but the system wouldn't let me give you any more for the second. So I have to respond.

If you don't have insurance for your boat then you damn well better make sure your neighbors have good dock lines.

I am no fan of insurance companies but they aren't your fairy god-mother for Pete's sake.

Take responsibility.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

sailingdog said:


> Jgeissinger-
> 
> *How does whitewater's lack of adequate insurance mitigate the other boater's responsibility to properly tie up his boat and secure it for a storm???? Just curious as to what bassackwards thinking comes up with that logic. *


Before you jump all over me SD. (notice I said before not lest), All I'm saying is that if it were me (and I suspect you), I would have made sure that my neighbors vessel was tied up properly if I were going to be absent from my own for any length of time.

If, for some reason I was afraid of adding a line to my neighbors boat then I damn sure would have hung a sh!# load of fenders over the side I was worrying about.

If I wasn't worrying at all then I don't have anyone to blame but myself.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

jgeissinger said:


> Sailingdog, it is very simple. If he had adequate coverage, his insurance would have repaired his boat and then decided, by communicating with other insurance carrier, whether there was liability on the part of the other boat owner. At that time his company could try to recover the damages from the other party. The point is that this would all be done by the insurance companies. All he would have to do is get his boat repaired, and not go through all this hassle. Also, there's really no need to yell.


That's a load of hooey! The other insurance company is likely trying the standard practise of making any recovery as inconvenient as possible. Just because they wouldn't pull the same malarkey with another insurance company doesn't make the practise reputable.

Carrying insurance on a two thousand dollar boat is a waste of money unless you get a rider stating that you're paying for replacement value. And we all know what that would cost. The idea that Whitewater should have insurance so that his company can do what his own simple phone call and explanation are capable of doing is the type of thinking designed to line the pockets of insurance companies for little of value to the purchaser.

There's more than enough of insurance companies running rough-shod over the little guy already without encouraging more of the practise. And, if it sounds like I'm yelling it's because I'm sick and tired of such corporations not doing what they are contractually obligated to do without the other party hiring a damn lawyer. Maybe Erie will step up and all will be dealt with appropriately but neither Whitewater, nor the insured boat's owner, should have to go through this. And shame on you for implying Whitewater's negligence in not carrying insurance.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

sailaway21 said:


> .....Carrying insurance on a two thousand dollar boat is a waste of money unless you get a rider stating that you're paying for replacement value. And we all know what that would cost......


Cost of doing business.

Ya pays yer money, ya takes yer chances.

If it ain't on paper, it don't mean S#!T.

Whoa, _*cliché*_ overload.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Knotty,
I think it's a rational decision based upon the owner's knowledge of his lack of insurance; he'll use and take care of the boat in a manner befitting his lack of coverage. In this case, there is another responsible party and so his decision to carry or not carry should be moot.


----------



## CalebD (Jan 11, 2008)

I believe that ALL CAPS is considered yelling, boldface would be considered speaking loudly (which is what Cam used on his previous post). In this case I have to side with Sway. Hell and gosh darn, a brand new Sunfish probably costs around 2 G's. Does anyone in their right mind get marine insurance on them (besides perhaps a club with a fleet for LIABILITY purposes)?
Now I know that WhiteWater's boat ain't no Sunfish but it also ain't a new Colgate 26 or anything like the comparable value of said asset. A few years premiums for insurance would equal the value of the boat. That said, if you do not insure directly, you self-insure, meaning you can cover any liabilities arising from your boat AND damage to your own (which would include disposing of it if it came to that). 
In this case the other boat owner is likely liable for damages for inadequately securing his vessel to the dock. I think he really needs to get a marine surveyor to come and do a damage/loss survey that should indicate the liability of his dock neighbor just to back his a$$ up should he end up in court. The survey would have to be considered 'testimony' from an expert witness, as it were, in a court. A surveyors report should carry a bit more weight with a judge than a bunch of pictures and explanations. A survey could also be forwarded to the insurance companies involved that are much happier to deal with surveyors than owners.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

The liability here is from the poorly tied up boats' owner. I matters not at all whether he had insurance, whether the damaged boat owner had insurance or what any involved insurance companies have to say. 

If one boat owner's negiligence ends up damaging your boat...then HE is responsible for fixing it or providing fair market value for the boat...whichever is less. You can get this resolution amicably from the owner, or from the owners insurance company but if push comes to shove, you can get it in small claims court. 
Court is especially helpful if the owner is insured and the insurer will not pay because the insurer will needs to be represented in court by an attorney. (It's a rule for corporations). Attorneys going to court cost more money than the repair so the company WILL cut a check even if they think there is a chance they could win in court. 
This comment applies only to small claims court and the specific circumstances related by Whitewater.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Thanks guys... as I said....

*How does whitewater's lack of adequate insurance mitigate the other boater's responsibility to properly tie up his boat and secure it for a storm????
*
Simple. It doesn't.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

*You obviously have no idea what personal responsibility and liability mean, do you?*



jgeissinger said:


> Sailingdog, it is very simple. If he had adequate coverage, his insurance would have repaired his boat and then decided, by communicating with other insurance carrier, whether there was liability on the part of the other boat owner. At that time his company could try to recover the damages from the other party. The point is that this would all be done by the insurance companies. All he would have to do is get his boat repaired, and not go through all this hassle. Also, there's really no need to yell.


----------



## jgeissinger (Feb 25, 2002)

*Liability*

Yes, of course I do. Going out of your way to throw in a personal attack was uncalled for and unnecessary. I get your point. Just let it drop, okay?


----------



## Duckwheat (May 6, 2008)

*Lack of insurance.....*

His lack of insurance is more indicative of the value he assigned the boat. He made the decision it was not worth much. From the pictes I would have to agree with his judgement. Now that the neighbors boat got loose it has become the Mona Lisa on water.

Nothing presented so far has "proved the neighbors negligence or liability". We just have whitwater's version of the occurrence.

I would like to put $10 on it WW gets blown off by the insurance companies. Small claims do not allow representation(lawyers) in most jursidictions.

Then he has to ask himself, the boat was not worth insuring, but it sure is worth suing the neighbor. I spent 12 years in the insurance business. The guy who called threatening to sue, was like a dog with no teeth. Yap, Yap.......... It was the letter notifying your client is getting sued is the only thing worth paying attention to.

Thoughtful as ever in Idaho

DW


----------



## Rockter (Sep 11, 2006)

You are going to make someone very rich, if they charge $5000 to fix that. 
Get yourself 5 litres of WEST system, two part epoxy, some breathing masks and ear defenders. Go in with a grinder, and grind off those metal studs sticking down that will resist you closing the gap. 
Put a big strap around the boat and ratchet it tight to close the gap.... close it and no more.
Slacken the rig until it's floppy.
Working form the inside, take the same grinder, and roughen up the GRP surfaces about 5" either side of the gap to give you a key for the WEST system.
Get yourself some GRP weave... say in 3 grades... coarse to fine.
Wet the weave with the two-part mix WEST system, wet the keyed surfaces.
Lay up the weave along the closed gap. Over-do it.... say 6" too long and 4" overlap each side.
Cut the next weave a little narrower and a little shorter.
Continue until it looks strong enough.
Make sure the job is continuous... no week-end breaks.
Do not slack the strap until the job is cured.
Tension your rig again.
Two part epoxy is very strong indeed.... just make sure that the job is not too stiff or too strong. Spread your repair stiffness. It does not look like it was very strong to start with.

At the end of the job it will not leak, and will be as good as it was, and you get to keep and use your boat, assuming you wanted to keep it.

You also don't have to bankrupt the guy next door. He will have problems fixing his own. Legally it sounds like it was a failed line on his boat that caused it, but there was nothing willfull about it. Why not fix both of them at once?. The jobs look very similar.... you learn so quickly when you have to.

Get him to buy some new mooring lines.


----------



## clayjay (Apr 21, 2007)

*Then again.....why not just accept it as an accident and get a life ?*

Why oh why do you Americans always believe that someone, ANYONE but them should have to pay for anything untoward that happens to them ??? 
It was America that started all this awful claim culture whereby any ******* can go out and do the dumbest, most stupid stuff, suffer some kind of injury or loss and then expect someone else, whether company or individual to pick up the bill because they were born with an IQ of 2.

So the guys mooring line broke, I'm sure he didn't think they were weak enough to break or he wouldn't have secured his own boat with them. So he made poor judgment - if that gives someone grounds to sue the courts will be full up for years to come taking care of all the dickheads who voted in Bush !
Hell, why not sue god for making the storm (I'm sure if he had an address to serve papers at some cretin would have done it by now - in fact if you believe Hollywood someone already has, for striking his boat with lightening)

Anyway, while your at it don't go for the measly cost of the repair, if ya gonna be a bear - be a grizzly. Go for mental stress too, that's got to be worth about $5,000,000, it was probably pretty hard on the 'lil lady at home as well having to listen to your pissing and moaning so she's gotta have something too for her subsequent depression, say $10,000,000 ?

And so with all that money you can go out and buy the powerboat you always really wanted......and a house with it's own mooring !


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

clayjay said:


> Why oh why do you Americans always believe that someone, ANYONE but them should have to pay for anything untoward that happens to them ???
> It was America that started all this awful claim culture whereby any ******* can go out and do the dumbest, most stupid stuff, suffer some kind of injury or loss and then expect someone else, whether company or individual to pick up the bill because they were born with an IQ of 2.
> 
> So the guys mooring line broke, I'm sure he didn't think they were weak enough to break or he wouldn't have secured his own boat with them. So he made poor judgment - if that gives someone grounds to sue the courts will be full up for years to come taking care of all the dickheads who voted in Bush !
> ...


I was with you till you called me a ********. 

IT'S KNOTHEAD DAMMIT


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I don't get it... This isn't the same as the idiot woman who burned herself with a cup of steaming hot coffee. Only an idiot would classify the two in the same category. * One was a woman being exceptionally stupid and trying to profit from it... the other is someone who did everything they were supposed having his boat damaged by someone who DID NOT. Not exactly the same thing. *

The OP here had done his due diligence and taken responsibility for HIS OWN BOAT. If the owner of the boat that hit his had done the same thing, there wouldn't be an issue at all. However, the owner of the other boat DID NOT TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS BOAT.

This was not a named storm, or even all that severe a storm from what I can see. The only two boats that were damaged, were damaged because the lines on the OP's neighbor's boat chafed through. Basic common sense says that you need to use chafe gear on dock ropes.

Basic common sense says you should use enough dock lines so that your boat won't become a hazard if any one of them breaks. Basic common sense says that you should check your docklines for chafe on a regular basis, and replace any that are chafing through. This dockline didn't chafe through like that overnight more likely than not-it probably occurred to some degree well before the storm did.

This is not a case where the OP did something stupid and expects to be compensated unnecessarily for it... but, apparently, you don't have the brains or the common sense to realize that.



clayjay said:


> Why oh why do you Americans always believe that someone, ANYONE but them should have to pay for anything untoward that happens to them ???
> * It was America that started all this awful claim culture whereby any ******* can go out and do the dumbest, most stupid stuff, suffer some kind of injury or loss and then expect someone else, whether company or individual to pick up the bill because they were born with an IQ of 2.*
> 
> So the guys mooring line broke, I'm sure he didn't think they were weak enough to break or he wouldn't have secured his own boat with them. So he made poor judgment - if that gives someone grounds to sue the courts will be full up for years to come taking care of all the dickheads who voted in Bush !
> ...


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

sailingdog said:


> I don't get it... This isn't the same as the idiot woman who burned herself with a cup of steaming hot coffee. Only an idiot would classify the two in the same category. * One was a woman being exceptionally stupid and trying to profit from it... the other is someone who did everything they were supposed having his boat damaged by someone who DID NOT. Not exactly the same thing. *


SD, I don't know how true this is but I heard that the particular fast food restaurant that served the "idiot woman", makes, or used to make their coffee considerable hotter than usual. Just a couple of degrees below boiling from what I understand. The purpose for this was that they apparently were able to use less coffee for the same amount of water. I had a cup recently at a location in Georgia and I can tell you that it was much hotter than anything that ever comes out of my coffee maker. 
I have spilled coffee on myself in the past but if I spilled that coffee it would more than likely have required hospitalization.

I'm not necessarily defending her but there is sometimes more to the story that we read in the daily paper.

BTW, that particular fast food restaurant is claiming to have gourmet coffee. Sorry, it ain't.



sailingdog said:


> *The OP here had done his due diligence and taken responsibility for HIS OWN BOAT*. If the owner of the boat that hit his had done the same thing, there wouldn't be an issue at all. However, the owner of the other boat DID NOT TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS BOAT.
> 
> This was not a named storm, or even all that severe a storm from what I can see. The only two boats that were damaged, were damaged because the lines on the OP's neighbor's boat chafed through. Basic common sense says that you need to use chafe gear on dock ropes.
> 
> ...


I understand both sides of this issue, but where I have a problem is where you say the _*"*_*The OP here had done his due diligence and taken responsibility for HIS OWN BOAT". *In my humble opinion, due diligence would have included checking his neighbors dock lines and doubling up on them if he thought it necessary or at the least hanging fenders. Especially if the neighbor wasn't around much. 
If he asked the owner of the offending vessel to change or add docklines and he refused then thats a whole different issue. 
If I were in a slip and there was a boat next to me or even the possibility that a boat would move in, I would have fenders out. Just in case the guy bumped me tyeing up. 
If you were to leave your boat for any length of time, don't tell me that you wouldn't check and make sure that any boat that could likely make contact with yours is tied up properly. 
As you say, the line probably showed signs of chafe before it failed on that fateful night. If someone had even just looked at it, the whole problem could have been averted. If the OP didn't want to double it up himself then he should have reported the problem to the marina and made sure that something was done.

I am not trying to absolve the neighbor from responsibility, but *clayjay* does make a point, (albeit rather abrasively), that we here in this country are a little sue-happy.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

I have held my tongue, but no longer.

I can't help but wounder if the OP was so unwilling to write a check to insure his boat and if it was his boat that broke loose and damaged his neighbors boat how quick and willing he would he be write a check for the damage to his neighbor. He did not take responsibility for his own boat. If he did this matter would be between insurance Co's and not wasting space on sailnet.

There is also a coverage in marine insurance policy's that most people don't think about is fire legal labially. It pays if a fire starts on my boat and spreads to another boat or burns up half a marina. I cannot help wonder about the OP personal worth, I hope he has deep pockets as soon or latter he will need it. A person not insuring his boat is a hazard to all of us.

*"The OP here had done his due diligence and taken responsibility for HIS OWN BOAT". I think not!*


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Yes, but the OP isn't responsible for his neighbors boat... Would it have been prudent to check his neighbor's boat... yes... was it his responsibility-NO. There's the difference.

*Besides, who's to say that between the time the OP checked on his boat, and re-tied the neighboring boat, the neighbor didn't come down, use his boat, and re-tie it in his usual, careless fashion. *That is why it is the responsibility of each individual boat owner to make sure his boat is properly secured.

Yes, fenders would have been prudent. But if the neighbor did his job right, they would have also been UNNECESSARY.

Bubb2-

I disagree. It was the owner's choice to not insure his boat... and he is liable for any damage that his boat causes if it should catch fire and damage other boats... however, that is his choice... he did do his responsibility as far as regards to storm preparation and proper dockline arrangements.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Dog, If the Op cause's damage lets hope he can write a check to cover it. As in most states we are required to carry coverage to protect us against uninsured motorists. It is people like this that costs you and I extra money as we insure our selfs against the know risks and costs us more when we have to pay extra to insure against the guys who don't carry insurance. 

I hope he's never docked next to you. or me.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

sailingdog said:


> _*Would it have been prudent to check his neighbor's boat... yes...*_
> 
> * Yes, fenders would have been prudent*.


I guess thats where we disagree. In my mind being _prudent_ is the most basic component of *due diligence.*


----------



## NOLAsailing (Sep 10, 2006)

I would hope that the OP has at least liability coverage. I was under the understanding that you had to in order to get a slip. If not, then OP - get it!

Some have suggested he should have noticed his neighbors lines and taken action to correct it. You can't do that. The day before Katrina came through, I noticed that my slip neighbor (an Islander 36) had almost no scope on his lines, no springs, and his sails and bimini were still up. He came out to "check" on the boat and it took a lot of talking just to get him to take the sails down (we had just had tropical storm that shredded a couple dozen sails throughout the marina and he was still reluctant). He soon left and I KNEW that is a major storm arrived, his boat would break loose. It did and it landed on my Triton. However, I would not want to be the last one that adjusted his lines. If it broke loose anyway, it would effectively be my fault.

Clayjay, what's all this "you Americans" crap? First, wherever you live, you have to accept responsibility if you damage someone else's property. George Washingtom himself first said, "You break it, you buy it." Also, in case you haven't been paying attention, you're either with us or against us, so get with the program.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

NOLAsailing said:


> Some have suggested he should have noticed his neighbors lines and taken action to correct it. _*You can't do that.*_ The day before Katrina came through, I noticed that my slip neighbor (an Islander 36) had almost no scope on his lines, no springs, and his sails and bimini were still up. He came out to "check" on the boat and it took a lot of talking just to get him to take the sails down (we had just had tropical storm that shredded a couple dozen sails throughout the marina and he was still reluctant). He soon left and I KNEW that is a major storm arrived, his boat would break loose. It did and it landed on my Triton. However, I would not want to be the last one that adjusted his lines. If it broke loose anyway, it would effectively be my fault.


You can't do that??...... Maybe you can't but I damn sure can, have and would do it again. If someone wanted to sue me, more power to em, I would love the chance to defend myself against charges like that.

Katrina is a pretty extreme example. Was your slip-mate the only boat to break loose in your marina?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Most states don't require anything in the way of boat insurance. Most marinas do...but apparently his does not.

I agree with you that uninsured boaters cost us money... so do idiots who buy houses in floodplains... 

Even if he were docked next to me or you, it wouldn't be a problem, since we probably have insurance to cover anything that happens. 



bubb2 said:


> Dog, If the Op cause's damage lets hope he can write a check to cover it. As in most states we are required to carry coverage to protect us against uninsured motorists. It is people like this that costs you and I extra money as we insure our selfs against the know risks and costs us more when we have to pay extra to insure against the guys who don't carry insurance.
> 
> I hope he's never docked next to you. or me.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

So knothead, is your boat wrapped with bubble wrap to protect it from every possible impact?? That would be prudent, would it not???


knothead said:


> I guess thats where we disagree. In my mind being _prudent_ is the most basic component of *due diligence.*


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Dog, remember, I have been involved in a boat collision where my wife was injured. (4 crushed disks permanent nerve damage) the other boater was found to be at fault. you can only get medical payments from you own insurance policy. loss of income, disability etc. comes from the party that is found at fault. if that party is uninsured you better hope he has assets.
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/8103-can-happen.html


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

sailingdog said:


> So knothead, is your boat wrapped with bubble wrap to protect it from every possible impact?? That would be prudent, would it not???


No, it's not. Bubble wrap doesn't work as well as a fender. So that would be stupid, not prudent.


----------



## NOLAsailing (Sep 10, 2006)

> Katrina is a pretty extreme example. Was your slip-mate the only boat to break loose in your marina?


Not so much.

Click here for my hurricance photos in the marina


----------



## dongreerps (May 14, 2007)

*liability*

Seems there is too much cart before the horse thinking going on in this matter. Logically, someone whose property has been damaged should approach the situation stepwise: 1) Figure out what you wish would happen to make it right. 2) Figure out what you appropriately desire the other party to do in the situation 3) Talk it over with the other party 4) Only as a last resort descend to litigation.
Please sit down and write yourself a letter describing what you wish the other party would do to make you whole again. Hide that letter. It is getting steam off your mind.
Then sit down and write a letter to the other party describing what you expect them to do to make your situation better. Be realistic, and appropriate. Write it as if some spy would steal it from you, and get it published on the front page of the local paper. In other words, don't say or ask for anything you would be ashamed of everyone learning. No anger. Just a reasonable person talking to another reasonable person about a problem that both of you desire to solve by working together. Think about what kind of letter you would want to get if it had been your boat that had done the damage. 
Having written the letter, your thoughts will be clarified. Put the letter in your desk, and go talk to the other guy. Be friendly. Present the problem, and what you hope for, but do not ask for a response. Give the guy a chance to think it over before he responds to you. Treat him like you would like to be treated if it had been your boat that did the damage. 
Immediately go home and write down everything you can remeber about the conversation, in case you have to go to the law. But first try and resolve it between yourselves.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Very true and a very good point, but currently, we were discussing unattended boats sitting at a dock in a marina during a storm. 



bubb2 said:


> Dog, remember, I have been involved in a boat collision where my wife was injured. (4 crushed disks permanent nerve damage) the other boater was found to be at fault. you can only get medical payments from you own insurance policy. loss of income, disability etc. comes from the party that is found at fault. if that party is uninsured you better hope he has assets.
> http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/8103-can-happen.html


----------



## cardiacpaul (Jun 20, 2006)

Once again, fine folks, we've travelled the minutae route.

Neither the OP's boat, NOR the offending boat were insured. 

There was MINIMAL damage (considering) and the 'value" of these tubs would't buy an electric windlass for Cam's or Dad's boat. (sorry guys, you know what I mean)

Check your ideals against your purse strings. How many of you HAVE boats worth a little more than 2k, (not 100k)and how many of YOU have all the required insurance riders? His state doesn't require insurance, and he made a calculated risk not having any. I wouldn't even try to insure a older 20 ft boat, cost far more than the value.

Yes, his boat got damaged. get 3 estimates for repair, and certify/registered mail the guy copies. See if he'll come up with some scratch. 
If not, stroll down to the courthouse and file a small claims suit. Good luck with that, if the repairs are over say, a grand, the judge will look over their glasses at you and say "how much would your boat sell for today?" 

Remember, they may have sources to check, so be in the ballpark. If the repairs are over half the value of the boat, don't look to collect all that much. (I should say "awarded") collection is another bag of beans altogether!

anyway, good luck with the repairs.


----------



## tweitz (Apr 5, 2007)

You may be looking at the wrong insurance. If the other boat owner has homeowner's insurance it may cover liability for the boat. It is analogous to liability and collision insurance for your car. Liability covers claims by other parties -- you, for example. Collision (or in the case of boats, hull insurance) covers damage to your own vehicle. He may have elected to not get hull insurance. The only person who takes a risk there is himself. Liability invoves risks to others, If you were to sue him or make a claim, his liability insurance would be invoked. Many homeowner's insurance policies cover all liability unless there is an exclusion. There is always an exclusion for boats, but that exclusion is itself often limited to boats 26 feet and over or with engines greater than some fairly low horsepower (6 comes to mind, but your mileage may vary). Tell the other guy to look at his homeowner's policy. 

Also an awful lot of the comments here seem to assume the laws and rules are identical everywhere. They are not. Jurisdiction and procedure in small claims courts varies dramatically from state to state and often within states. I also have never heard of a small claims court excluding lawyers anywhere, it just doesn't pay to hire one for a small claim.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

*I also have never heard of a small claims court excluding lawyers anywhere, it just doesn't pay to hire one for a small claim.

*Exactly...but when you sue a corporation, they must have a lawyer speak for the corporation...hence a small claims court case is often settled by the corp to save $$ over the cost of the lawyer.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

camaraderie said:


> *I also have never heard of a small claims court excluding lawyers anywhere, it just doesn't pay to hire one for a small claim.
> 
> *Exactly...but when you sue a corporation, they must have a lawyer speak for the corporation...hence a small claims court case is often settled by the corp to save $$ over the cost of the lawyer.


Here in FL a corporate officer is allowed to represent the Corp. in Small Claims Court.
At least that was the case a year or so ago.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Knot...I stand corrected. OTOH....my guess is that the CEO/Officer of some large insurance co. is gonna be even more expensive than his/her minions!


----------



## clayjay (Apr 21, 2007)

*Oh really.....?*



NOLAsailing said:


> I would hope that the OP has at least liability coverage. I was under the understanding that you had to in order to get a slip. If not, then OP - get it!
> 
> Some have suggested he should have noticed his neighbors lines and taken action to correct it. You can't do that. The day before Katrina came through, I noticed that my slip neighbor (an Islander 36) had almost no scope on his lines, no springs, and his sails and bimini were still up. He came out to "check" on the boat and it took a lot of talking just to get him to take the sails down (we had just had tropical storm that shredded a couple dozen sails throughout the marina and he was still reluctant). He soon left and I KNEW that is a major storm arrived, his boat would break loose. It did and it landed on my Triton. However, I would not want to be the last one that adjusted his lines. If it broke loose anyway, it would effectively be my fault.
> 
> Clayjay, what's all this "you Americans" crap? First, wherever you live, you have to accept responsibility if you damage someone else's property. George Washingtom himself first said, "You break it, you buy it." Also, in case you haven't been paying attention, you're either with us or against us, so get with the program.


Hahahahaha........typical, so basically what you are saying, or rather that gang of muppets that decide your foreign policy IS: It's our way or no way.

Well matey, I too live in a free country and I've decided that if getting dragged into pointless wars/conflicts that are unwinable (Vietnam, Iraq, Mogadishu etc etc) or even worse, going there and failing to do the job properly (Iraq 1990 - what a cock up) and killing god knows how many people on your own side in 'friendly fire' incidents, all 'cus little Chuck wants to play Maverick and Goose is being WITH YOU.......I'll pass. I grew out of being in gangs when I was 10 and my catapult broke.

That's certainly not to say I'm against you, I've met too many extremely likeable Americans on my travels to know there is hope for the planet, even though they are in the extreme minority. As one recently said to me over a beer 'I must apologise for our countries decision to downsize the presidential intellect'.

The sooner more Americans apply for a passport and get out and see a little of the world, the sooner more of them will realise you are NOT the chosen one's.

Now you have a nice day.


----------



## Freesail99 (Feb 13, 2006)

> The sooner more Americans apply for a passport and get out and see a little of the world, the sooner more of them will realise you are NOT the chosen one's.
> 
> Now you have a nice day.


An insult with a have a nice day, perhaps he is Canadian ? On Memorial day no less, real class.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Brit/Aussie ClayJay...you'd be speaking German/Japanese today without us. Keep your political crap in off topic. Nice "Memorial Day" gift to your American allies.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Free-

Unfortunately, some people have no class... at all...He's like Seven Up... never had it, never will.


----------



## nk235 (Apr 8, 2007)

clayjay said:


> Hahahahaha........typical, so basically what you are saying, or rather that gang of muppets that decide your foreign policy IS: It's our way or no way.
> 
> Well matey, I too live in a free country and I've decided that if getting dragged into pointless wars/conflicts that are unwinable (Vietnam, Iraq, Mogadishu etc etc) or even worse, going there and failing to do the job properly (Iraq 1990 - what a cock up) and killing god knows how many people on your own side in 'friendly fire' incidents, all 'cus little Chuck wants to play Maverick and Goose is being WITH YOU.......I'll pass. I grew out of being in gangs when I was 10 and my catapult broke.
> 
> ...


Oh man I wish I could meet this guy in person....I love how people come onto an American message board, then hi-jack a thread about some poor guy who had his boat all xxx up and was just asking a basic couple of questiosn of what he should do, and start bashing America and Americans ON MEMORIAL DAY. - Just do us all a favor and take it somewhere else. I personally love my country and support it and I don't need or want to listen to some liberal xxx tell me from all the way in france or wherever the xxx you are how xxx americans are on a xxx SAILING MESSAGE BOARD.

OK now that I got that out I wanted to say I agree with some of the comments that one should always be prudent and check yours and your neighbore's boat and some extra fenders could have prevented this. Also I do hate how some people in general like to sue over everything and I wish it weren't the case and that people should take some responsibility of their own even if something like this happens. On the other hand it does frusterate me how little people know or care to know on how to tie up their boat properly or even basic things like tieing a cleat hitch or a certain knot. I just spend three days on the boat this weekend cruising LI sound and I was amazed at how many people had no clue on how to properly tie off their boat. $100k boats bouncing off the pilings, people having know clue how to tie a cleat hitch so they just keep wraping the dock line around the cleat until it fills up...bows bouncing off the dock because there are no spring lines...jibs half unfurled and unsecured flapping in the wind while the boat is sitting unattended on a mooring. In one day, (it is a crowed Memorial Day weekend) I saw one boat fall off the trailer and crunch onto the concrete, and two boats run right aground because the owners had no clue how to stay in a well marked channel.

I have only been boating and sailing for 4 years and am only in my early 20's but I took a lot of time to read, take courses, ask questions and learn from others about the proper ways of doing things. I take a lot of pride in my boat, it's appearance and securing it properly to protect itself as well as other's boats. Although I know I have much more to learn, I feel I am always helping others twice my age tie up, or showing them how to rig lines or sails or how to fix something on their boat. It also ceases to amaze me at how many people don't even care to learn the right way to do things. And I don't even mean the "proper" way of doing things like bringing your fenders in while your out sailing but the "right" way in terms of the bare basics of boat handleing.

I guess I take both sides in this arguments that one can't always blame others because the net net of it is that even though this was the other guys fault, if the boat owner had threw on a set of springs or extra fenders onto the other guys boat the damage wouldn't have occured. He could have always spoke to the guy after and made sure from then on he knew how to tie up his boat. On the other hand it would still piss the hell out of me that some other idiot xxx up my boat because he was an idiot and didn't know how to tie up his boat. I also agree 100% that the owner of the boat that broke loose should be responsible for the damage regardless of insurance, court, lawyers, America, McDonald's cofee, the small storm that did this(this was not Katrina or any other major storm) or any other reason that was discussed on here. I believe it's just the right thing to do and if my boat ever did any damage to someone elses because I didn't secure it right or whatever other reason of negligence on my behalf, I would absolutely take care of the damages.

Now to the original poster, good luck with whatever happens. I hope you can get your boat fixed or get a new one and in the future you will now have a keener eye as to how many idiot there really are out there.


----------



## Rockter (Sep 11, 2006)

Where are you from there Clayjay?
That venomous anti-Americanism must be rooted somewhere perfect and paradisical, what say?
Oh, it must be marvellous to live somewhere like that. 
I wish I did.
I would so like to learn more or maybe even visit.
Now where is it?


----------



## clayjay (Apr 21, 2007)

Off Topic ...profanity...deleted


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

*ANY FURTHER POSTS...on this topic which do not address the OP's issue will be deleted.*


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Have you gotten estimates for repairs, other than the first one, which seemed very, very low... considering the extent of the damage?

Have you contacted the owner of the other boat again?


----------



## senatorcongressman (Jun 20, 2007)

Good luck with Erie.

I was hit by a driver who ran a stop sign a couple of years ago. It was low speed, no injuries, but my Alfa Spider, whose engine I just finished rebuilding, suffered a crushed front end and hood and suspension damage. Since I had bought the car as a project for $1k, and it was a work in progress, I had liability insurance only, he had full coverage with Erie. At first Erie refused to even talk to me "we only deal with other insurance companies or our clients, no third parties" Of course my insurance company refused to help, since it was my damage and I wasn't at fault. Then, Erie refused to pay for the body work since it would exceed the fair value of the car. They would only pay 70% of book value since the car was TMU (I replaced non-functioning gauges). After "total loss"ing the car, their buyback offer was a joke, as the "new parts" I had in it were worth too much. It was something like I could keep the car and $200.

The person at Erie handling my claim was very unprofessional, rarely returned my calls and repeatedly changed his tune every time we spoke. Their adjuster also was a two time no-show. Ditto for their "scene investigator" as the other driver denied he even had a stop sign.

Lesson learned, insurance companies are in business of making money, not serving customers OR accident victims. The more you pester them, the better chances you have of recovering a loss. They actually count on you not following through.

I would not be surprised if Erie offers you something along the lines of 70% of market value. Unless of course I totally misread these 10 pages. Did he have a boat policy with Erie or a homeowners policy?


----------



## Duckwheat (May 6, 2008)

*liability,,,*

I think White water has left the party about 4 pages ago. It is amazing the energy this generated.

Newby guy looking for some comrades against the incompetent neighbor. All sorts of legal and personal opinions. Then for seasoning an anti-American tirade. I find those preaching tolerance are often the least tolerant. The same could be said for those preaching the ignorance of the American people for electing W. Take care of your own business and lead by shining example. Until then keep your yap shut unless we ask for an opinion.

DW


----------



## whitewater7 (May 7, 2007)

*Thank Goodness for digital photography!*

Sorry, I've been away from this thread. I did try to turn the notifier on when I started this! There's so many things going on in my life right now and the boat is just one of them.

Anyway, here's the update:

I received a settlement check today from Erie for $1800, which probably will not cover the entire cost of repairing the boat. I'm satisfied with the outcome. It was more than I thought they would offer.

I had another fiberglass guy look at it, whose hourly rate was a lot less, and he said it would cost about $2200 to fix it.

I think the amount offered was fair, and at this point I'm not going to spend more money for an appraisal, which would cost another $250, to find out that my rare 1969 sailboat isn't worth much, even in good condition.

Besides, I just started a new contract job and don't want to lose time and more money by pursuing the issue in court.

I'm not sure what I'm going to do with the boat at this point.

Thanks to all for offering suggestions and ideas. You guys are a spirited bunch, for sure!

PS...Special thanks to our moderator Camaraderie and also CalebD and Rockter who offered fiberglass repair tips.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

You're welcome...glad it worked out to your satisfaction without a lot of hassles. Thanks for letting us know the outcome.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

WW7-

If you decide to go ahead with the repairs, feel free to ask for advice.  Doing that kind of repair is well within your abilities... it won't be the prettiest of repairs, but it should be doable so the boat is once again seaworthy and safe to sail.


----------



## VanIsland (Apr 21, 2012)

so 6 years later here I am.
New family into sailing, all excited by it, meet some very very helpfully sailors in our marina that helped us learn the ropes

Then a year later, the bottom fell out, the entire family is devastated.
Simple and to the point
We had our sail boat at a public marina for over a year.
A month ago there was a storm. 
A boat owner that has two sail boats moored in open waters, one new and the other older that has a for sale sign. The older boat broke free, wedged itself between the dock and our stern. Their outboard pounder our boat so hard that it knocked off their outboard into the ocean. We got estimates ranging from $20,000 to $10,000.

Unfortunately or stupidly we do not have insurance. Their insurance company wrote off their boat and instructed the surveyor to tell us that the cause of damages to our boat was, yes........ “Act of God” and we are SOL.

My thinking is
1.	If it is an act of god then why did their insurance company pay for their damages?
2.	If they are claiming that it is an act of god and they took ever reasonable precaution against the storm. Did they take the same amount of care on their older boat as they did on the newer one?

Any advice is appreciated, every time I thick about this whole situation, I feel sick to my gut. Already lost a lot of sleep and it may be the end of my sailing days.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

VanIsland, I hope you saved enough not buying insurance to hire an attorney as that is the only chance you have to recover from the other boat owner. Any storm is an act of God. You must be able to prove that the other boat owner did not take "reasonable precautions." Such as under sized mooring lines or something of that nature. This claim is a month old and if those lines still exist you have no right to inspect them with out a court order. Quite frankly this is an age old type of claim. If a tornado picks up my house and throws on to your house, it does not make me responsible because there was nothing I could do to prevent it (act of God). It is also the reason we should both have insurance coverage for our own property damage.


----------



## BCC1 (Dec 18, 2011)

VanIsland, 7 or 8 years ago in NYC during a severe storm, a moored boat broke loose and hit my docked 38' boat. Considerable gelcoat damage occurred before yacht club locals dragged his boat off.

He did not want to claim (wanted me to use my insurance) but ultimately I was able to get the number of his provider and they sent an adjuster. 

And paid.

Push hard. Politely.


----------



## VanIsland (Apr 21, 2012)

Thanks BCC1, encouraging news.

I guess I am looking at it from the point that not everything was done to pevent the older boat from breaking free. Obviously the same thing did not happen to their newer boat.
So do I still haveto inspect their lines.
They own two boats in the same area, one broke free while the other did not.
Was the same care given to both?


----------



## msmith10 (Feb 28, 2009)

VanIsland said:


> So do I still haveto inspect their lines.


Checking your neighbor's dock lines is one thing. Running around an anchorage checking mooring lines is another- this would not be a reasonable expectation.
However, if this happened a month ago, you've discussed it with the other party and the other party's insurer has already brushed you off, I think you have no alternative other than to contact a lawyer.
"How you're looking at it" is irrelevant. You can make all the legal arguments you want in your head- you need an attorney to make pertinent arguments that will end up giving results. $10-20k in damages certainly justifies the expense. The longer you wait the less compelling your case would seem to be.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

msmith10 said:


> ... $10-20k in damages certainly justifies the expense. The longer you wait the less compelling your case would seem to be.


That cost is unlikely to justify a court case. The legal fees involved in taking a suit to court will run that much, maybe more. Pretty bad odds if the most you can hope to to recoup your legal fees.

So a lawyer and a suit wont happen. Situations like this are the reason to have your own insurance, as the OP stated he did not, he is out-of-luck.

Not fair, but that life.


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

VanIsland said:


> so 6 years later here I am.
> New family into sailing, all excited by it, meet some very very helpfully sailors in our marina that helped us learn the ropes
> 
> Then a year later, the bottom fell out, the entire family is devastated.
> ...


Where the moorings owned by a marina or the owner of the boats? If it was a marina, was it the same marina you keep your boat at?
If so, the marinas insurance company may at least hear you out. I'm not saying anyone else is liable, but, it's worth looking into.


----------



## IslanderGuy (Apr 26, 2008)

VanIsland said:


> so 6 years later here I am.
> New family into sailing, all excited by it, meet some very very helpfully sailors in our marina that helped us learn the ropes
> 
> Then a year later, the bottom fell out, the entire family is devastated.
> ...


It's important to understand the basis for insurance, something that seems to be missing from a lot of the posts in the original thread. (BTW, a new thread would probably get a better response, and many won't read to the end to see the new issue)

Without insurance companies in the picture, the law is fairly straight forward...

If you damage your own property, you are responsible to pay for it if you chose to, or you can throw it out, sell it, whatever. It's yours, its your fault, its your problem.

If you damage someone else's property, either directly (bad driving and hitting there car) or indirectly through negligence or incompetence (you parked on a hill without setting the break and the car rolled down into someone else's car) you are responsible to pay for repair or replacement. It's your fault, not theirs, and they should not take the loss for your actions.

If your property damages someone else's due to an "Act of God" or "Force of Nature" you are not responsible under the law, stuff happens that is out of our control. A tornado picks up your car and smashes it into someone else's car. No one is at fault, it was an odd and unforeseeable circumstance that couldn't be avoided. You both are responsible only for the damage to your own vehicles.

Insurance is simply paying someone else a little at a time, so that if the need arises, they can make the large payout for you in the even of damage.

There are two kinds of insurance, generally called liability and comprehensive. They both have different rules.

Liability is basically saying "If you owe anyone else money due to damages to their person or property per the law, the insurance company will pay for you instead." This protects you from having to make a large payout to someone else, but doesn't offer you anything to repair or replace your own property, that's your responsibility. If you get in an accident, liability will pay for the other car, but not yours. This is required on cars in most states to protect the other drivers as most people do not have the cash to pay for repairs or replacement of a $50,000 vehicle.

Comprehensive, on the other hand, is only to pay for your own property, and has no bearing on payments to other people for their loss. These policies can have various provisions or restrictions, which also influences the price the companies charge for the coverage. These can cover "Act of God" type incidences, or cover you if the other guy is at fault, but doesn't have insurance and has no way to come up with the money owed. These various "options" all effect the price of the insurance, as the possibility of payouts goes up.

So in this case, I do not think you will get anywhere with the "but you payed for their boat" argument, as they are under different policies. If this falls into an "Act of God" category, and the person would not be responsible for damage to your boat under the law without insurance, then the other guy is not responsible to pay you, so the insurance company also does not need to pay you for them.

Under their comprehensive coverage though, they have been paying a little every month so that if something happens which is covered under their comprehensive policy, they will get paid for the damages. If there policy covers "Act of God", then they get paid for there loss on the comprehensive coverage, but you still get nothing because under the law, you are not owed anything.

I think the only place you have a case to argue this is should this event be classified as an "Act of God" or not? I'm no expert on this subject, but it seems to me that high winds that are normal for an area do not qualify. If the "storm" hit 50 mph winds, and its normal to see that much wind 6 - 10 times a year, I wouldn't think that qualifies. To me that would mean you should be prepared for that high of winds, and this would go to negligence.

If however, the storm had 100mph winds, and winds above 70 only occur once every 10 - 20 years, then yes, this could likely be considered as an "Act of God".

So I think the important thing is to find out how bad the storm was, how unusual or usual that is in your area, and what insurance companies are allowed to classify as "Act of God". Then you can decide if you have a case. (That shouldn't take to long looking around the net.)

Also, be very careful of using the word "STORM" in any communication about the incident, written or verbal as that brings up images of hurricanes, tornados and mass catastrophe, especially to the average non-boating desk jocky at the insurance agency. Was it really a "STORM" or was it "seasonably expected winds that should be accounted for when securing a vessel to a mooring ball" or some such non-catastrophe image inducing Verbiage.

If you think you have a case, write it up as factual and unemotional as possible (and without the word "STORM") and send it to the insurance company. If that doesn't help, pay a lawyer for an hour or two to write up something on letterhead with lots of legal words to send to the insurance agent. As stated before, insurance agencies can loose a lot more then they save if you go to court, even if they win. This shows your serious, and you don't need to higher a lawyer long term or even get a really good one at this point.

HOWEVER: As I said, I am no expert at this, but I do feel I have a decent understanding of insurance and wanted to share it. I night be wrong. Don;t take this as legal advice. Your mileage may very, use at your own risk, blah blah blah. Others will likely correct what I said, listen to them as I'm sure they know more, or at least it will all be their fault then! 

Oh, and good luck, I hope this one bad incident doesn't put you off boating forever!


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

It is one thing to get a bunch of people on a sailing forum to say "Yeah, he should have tied up his boat better." It is a whole different matter to make that argument well enough that a judge (who probably doesn't know anything about boats or what a "spring line" is) will conclude that actionable negligence was involved. All I can say is, good luck (because I think you're going to need it).


----------



## jzk (Feb 25, 2008)

T34C said:


> I'd say you have a good argument. Your neighbors boat hit yours and caused damage. It should be their responsibility no matter what the cause.
> 
> If a powerboat makes a wake near a marina they are responsible for any damage that the wake may cause. If your cars rolls down your driveway and hits the car across the street, it is your fault weather you had the parking break set or not....


That is not exactly how the law works. What you are describing is strict liability. In the US, there must be negligence.

Here is an example. I am driving a powerboat through a marina at a safe speed. All of a sudden, I have my first ever epileptic seizure that I had no reason to think I was at risk of having. I cut your boat in two and send it to the bottom.

Do I have any liability? No.

If I had my 10th such seizure, then I am negligent for operating a vessel in my condition.

This case in the OP seems ripe for a negligence claim, but it depends on the exact circumstances. If the cleats pulled out through no fault of the boat owner, then no liability, etc.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Van, I am sure that if you are in the US part of this will depend on your state and what the state laws are. Other than that, SPEAK TO A LAWYER.

I know insurance companues have paid for damages when a boat broke free from a mooring in a storm, so whether that guy or his insurer are responsible probably depends on the details, and you have to ask, is it worth paying $100-150 to consult an attorney rather than taking a $20,000 loss all by yourself?

You may also find that the insurer changes their tune after they get a letter on an attorney's letterhead citing the reasons that they are responsible and of course, if he has to bring suit, they'll have to pay his fees as well.

Find a lawyer with insurance experience, preferably boating experience. Your local marina or repair yard may be able to refer one to you, or your ex-insurer or a local agent may know one. Have a short conversation.

The storm may have been an act of god, but failing to secure the boat and inspect the mooring was an act of negligence. No god needed.


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

jzk said:


> That is not exactly how the law works. What you are describing is strict liability. In the US, there must be negligence.
> 
> Here is an example. I am driving a powerboat through a marina at a safe speed. All of a sudden, I have my first ever epileptic seizure that I had no reason to think I was at risk of having. I cut your boat in two and send it to the bottom.
> 
> ...


I am no lawyer either, but have had to deal with them and the courts in cases where I was sued or sued someone. In the above case I think you would be liable for the damage, even if the cause was out of your control. That is what liability insurance is for.

In any case I agree the OP should have an initial consultation with a lawyer. You could probably explain your case over the phone and they would tell you if you should pursue the case. The law get complex with required court filings and associated paper work. You may be able to collect your legal fees as well as damages.

If the boat was not well secured, seems you should get paid to fix your boats damages.


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

Yes, the main thing to remember--once again--is that internet legal advice is worth exactly what you pay for it... NOTHING!


----------



## yossarian (Apr 29, 2012)

There is a lot of bad legal advice/explanations in this thread. Go talk to a lawyer. It is a common insurance strategy to simply deny liability at first to see if you go away. You will probably not have to go to court- 99% of insurance claims are settled. You will need a lawyer. The $$$ involved is not at all too low to get a lawyer involved.

Go see a lawyer - the sooner the better. It shouldn't cost you a penny and you could recover your losses.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

yossarian said:


> Go see a lawyer - the sooner the better. It shouldn't cost you a penny and you could recover your losses.


Low-end lawyers start around $200/hour.

If you get a free conversation, then he/she may not be too busy, which makes it very likely that after a free conversation, they will happily make a case out of your gripe, at the hourly rate.

Good luck finding one with material marine knowledge, making it likely he/she will learn using your hourly fees.

Chances a situation like this will ever be presented in court case, not much, unless you are a lawyer, and not too busy a lawyer at that.

(I am only stating my experience from an attempted legal case for a damaged boat, after I learned the above, I instead took the greatly depreciated payment originally offered by my insurance company. When push came to shove, the case's court prep costs killed the concept).


----------



## yossarian (Apr 29, 2012)

That's more bad legal advice. Any lawyer that specializes in property damage cases will not charge an hourly fee. They take a contingency, usually 30% of the total recovery. Almost all of them offer free consultations because they WANT to take good cases and want to reject bad ones. It gives them a chance to evaluate the merits of the case before they agree to take it - it works to their benefit as well as yours. And yes, there is little chance that the case would go to court, but that's because the insurance company will (if you have any case at all) start making settlement offers and the lawyer will negotiate for a good offer.

Go talk to a lawyer. Don't get legal advice from people on the internet.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

yossarian said:


> That's more bad legal advice. Any lawyer that specializes in property damage cases will not charge an hourly fee. They take a contingency, usually 30% of the total recovery. Almost all of them offer free consultations because they WANT to take good cases and want to reject bad ones.....


Frankly your advice sounds like something you read somewhere.

The reason a lawyer would not take a case like the OP's on contingency is that 30% of what MIGHT be collected would in no way be good payment for the time he/she would need to invest to earn a judgement. Simply wont happen.

Pay a lawyer for two hours of time to write a demand letter and hope to get lucky? Sure. Head off on a course to court, forgetaboutit.


----------



## yossarian (Apr 29, 2012)

sailingfool said:


> Frankly your advice sounds like something you read somewhere.
> 
> The reason a lawyer would not take a case like the OP's on contingency is that 30% of what MIGHT be collected would in no way be good payment for the time he/she would need to invest to earn a judgement. Simply wont happen.
> 
> Pay a lawyer for two hours of time to write a demand letter and hope to get lucky? Sure. Head off on a course to court, forgetaboutit.


Actually, I am a lawyer. I'm not in the civil recovery field, but I work with those that are. Any lawyer who has some spare time (and most do these days) will do a free consultation. If the situation is as clear cut as OP says (no possible negligence on the OP's end, only a question of possible negligence on the part of the owner of the unmoored boat) and the other boat is really insured, OP will be able to find someone to take the case on a contingency basis. They take much smaller cases all the time.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

yossarian said:


> ... If the situation is as clear cut as OP says (no possible negligence on the OP's end, only a question of possible negligence on the part of the owner of the unmoored boat) and the other boat is really insured, ....


A pretty big IF - do you often find a situation to actually turn out to be as clear cut as one party chooses to describe it?


----------



## yossarian (Apr 29, 2012)

sailingfool said:


> A pretty big IF - do you often find a situation to actually turn out to be as clear cut as one party chooses to describe it?


Yeah. A lot of the time, things are pretty clear cut and the insurance companies just jerk people around to see if they'll go away.

And to the extent that the OP is only telling part of the story, a lawyer will figure that out pretty quick and proceed accordingly. It's what they do.

Really, what OP is talking about is pretty basic stuff. I don't want to make it sound easier than it is, because there's a lot of knowledge and experience that supports the whole process, but the process is often pretty simple. Client comes in, tells a story. Lawyer asks some questions, asks the client to provide all the documentation they have, sends a paralegal out to take a couple big glossy photos of whatever damage we're talking about, and writes a demand letter requesting a highly inflated settlement complete with gory photos of the damage. Insurance company offers something minimal, parties dicker, finally settle on something reasonable. 99% of the time, that's how it works.


----------



## jzk (Feb 25, 2008)

casey1999 said:


> I am no lawyer either, but have had to deal with them and the courts in cases where I was sued or sued someone. In the above case I think you would be liable for the damage, even if the cause was out of your control. That is what liability insurance is for.
> 
> In any case I agree the OP should have an initial consultation with a lawyer. You could probably explain your case over the phone and they would tell you if you should pursue the case. The law get complex with required court filings and associated paper work. You may be able to collect your legal fees as well as damages.
> 
> If the boat was not well secured, seems you should get paid to fix your boats damages.


Again, I know of no US jurisdiction that would hold one strictly liable for this kind of incident. There must be negligence. I am admitted to practice law in Florida.

However, as you advise, the OP should seek the advice of an attorney, or a few.


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

jzk said:


> Again, I know of no US jurisdiction that would hold one strictly liable for this kind of incident. There must be negligence. I am admitted to practice law in Florida.
> 
> However, as you advise, the OP should seek the advice of an attorney, or a few.


I am a little confused about liability. If a boat breaks free of a moring (during a storm or not) and damages my boat, it seems the boat that broke free should be responsible for my damage. After all that was the boat that did the damage, if that boat did not exist, I would have no damage. On my insurance for my boat, I have $300k in liability, I would think this would cover any damage my boat does no matter how it happens (as long as not intentional).
Regards


----------



## jzk (Feb 25, 2008)

casey1999 said:


> I am a little confused about liability. If a boat breaks free of a moring (during a storm or not) and damages my boat, it seems the boat that broke free should be responsible for my damage. After all that was the boat that did the damage, if that boat did not exist, I would have no damage. On my insurance for my boat, I have $300k in liability, I would think this would cover any damage my boat does no matter how it happens (as long as not intentional).
> Regards


You are describing a strict liability scenario. That doesn't exist in any jurisdiction that I know of. Now, if someone can prove that the person that is responsible for that boat was negligent in how they tied it up, then they are liable.

Insurance is a different matter. Insurance is a contract between you and the insurance company whereby the insurance company agrees to be responsible for a host of situations, and not responsible for a host of others. Hence, you should read your policy very carefully.

Here is another real-life example that actually happened to me, and perhaps others on this site. My neighbor's tree fell on my fence during a storm. My insurance company decided that my neighbor was not liable, so they did not subrogate a claim against them (and their insurance company). My insurance company paid me because that sort of thing was covered.

Now, I later discovered that the tree fell because it was rotting out inside, and another next to it fell a year before I moved there for the same reason. Thus, the neighbor had reason to know that those trees might present a foreseeable risk of harm. It might be further arguable that by not having it checked out that they were negligent. But that is a far cry from the neighbor being liable merely because of the fact that their tree fell onto my fence.


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

jzk said:


> That is not exactly how the law works. What you are describing is strict liability. In the US, there must be negligence.
> 
> Here is an example. I am driving a powerboat through a marina at a safe speed. All of a sudden, I have my first ever epileptic seizure that I had no reason to think I was at risk of having. I cut your boat in two and send it to the bottom.
> 
> ...


In your above situation say you have full insurance on your powerboat (comp and liability). Even though you are not liable would your insurace company pay for the boat cut in two by your power boat and also pay for any damage to your powerboat. Or could they tell the owner of the cut in two boat, sorry we are not liable?


----------



## jzk (Feb 25, 2008)

casey1999 said:


> In your above situation say you have full insurance on your powerboat (comp and liability). Even though you are not liable would your insurace company pay for the boat cut in two by your power boat and also pay for any damage to your powerboat. Or could they tell the owner of the cut in two boat, sorry we are not liable?


Without reading your policy, I would imagine that you would be covered. Just like I was with the tree example.


----------

