Hurricane Ian Ripple Effects: Questions for the Professionals on the Forum

[BruceK]

Man Made Climate Change

Ah yes, we`ve fixed that. If we mine and burn coal here it contributes but if we mine it and sell it overseas, eg to China, India, etc and they burn it, it doesn`t contribute. Odd, but there it is, apparently.
Following that logic, we could import some coal, burn it,and it wouldn`t contribute to MMCC. Even more confusing .

 

[Simi 60]

Man Made Climate Change

Thanks for that
And I did actually Google MMCC climate change which bought up the mini circus children but nothing else climate changie.

Now, where's that start button, I have some dinosaur bones to burn.

 

[O C Diver]

In 2019 one of the biggest marine insurers lost Lloyds as an underwriter and went with Berkshire Hathaway/Chubb.

Is the "biggest marine insurers" an international insurance agency or only in Australia?

Yes, Australia lost boats in cyclones as well but with a population a very small % of the USA it stands to reason the losses would have been considerably smaller here by comparison.

Do you know for a fact and can you point to a credible source, that Australian recreational boating insurance was profitable for Lloyds, the underwriter, before they pulled out of the Australian market?

I find it hard to believe that Lloyds gave up a profitable market to let another underwriter take their profitable business. Does Australia have a law limiting how much an underwriter can increase premiums from one year to the next?

I find it incredibly hard to imagine why Lloyds wouldn't raise their underwriting premium, unless the losses in that specific market were too great.

I find blaming the American recreational boating market a convenient excuse (probably started by your boat insurance companies). Is your car insurance tied to our country also? How about homeowners insurance?

Ted

 

[garbler]

Lloyd’s and the London markets are kind of hard to pinpoint. This is a big big underwriting exchange unlike anything over here. Much of the business is what is called ‘ reinsurance ‘ . These operators work in the margins, you being the assured, and buy or assume a percentage of a risk. So if you are Mr. Big Marine and want somebody to write a 300 million dollar policy or risk and if nobody here can or wants to handle it then it’s put out on the London exchanges and look for somebody to take a percentage of the action. I know a few of these people and it’s kind of like investing in international commodities so it’s really interesting business. I mean these guys know their stuff.

But understand this is a business that for centuries is built on profit generated by knowing the risks and playing the averages. Without marine shipping insurance, the York Antwerp Rules and associated safety standards this country and any other who relied on imports would be screwed. Everybody can bitch and moan about premium increases on their boats which are honestly secondary to many. But like any other business of this size it’s roots are wide and into many other markets so premiums don’t always reflect just your personal circumstance's but international .

Just review how many marine underwriters come and go. New ones pop up and their producers or agents are their to sell the product. Quite often they ‘buy’ the business, that is, break into a market with very low pricing in order to fill their books then creep into higher rates when they must to make a profit. Years later they either pull out of the market altogether or limit their book to values, yacht sizes and locations. The big players will hang in there but will never be the cheapest. For some looking for hard to get coverage it pays to find a firm or broker who handles ‘ special risks ‘ as they are able to shop the companies to fit. But the bottom line is finding a good broker or agent who will search out and work for you. Those that are locked up into one or two companies are often not going help in the long run, but not always.

Rick

 

[Simi 60]

Is the "biggest marine insurers" an international insurance agency or only in Australia?

I did answer that question earlier
"Lloyds and the insurance company involved are a worldwide company, not just Australian"

Do you know for a fact and can you point to a credible source, that Australian recreational boating insurance was profitable for Lloyds, the underwriter, before they pulled out of the Australian market?

If you are taking premiums and not having thousands of boats wiped out by hurricanes, simple maths and logic says it's profitable.

I find it hard to believe that Lloyds gave up a profitable market to let another underwriter take their profitable business.

If you read the article I posted it clearly states that Lloyds got out of the world market, or at least 95% of it.

Does Australia have a law limiting how much an underwriter can increase premiums from one year to the next?

Does America
Does it matter?

I find it incredibly hard to imagine why Lloyds wouldn't raise their underwriting premium, unless the losses in that specific market were too great

.
Again, their market is the world.
Private vessel insurance was a loss making business
The biggest proportion of private vessel ownership is the US.
And the biggest loss came from???

I find blaming the American recreational boating market a convenient excuse (probably started by your boat insurance companies)
Ted

It's probably the biggest market in the world with the largest amount of loss making claims
Again, simple maths and logic

Is your car insurance tied to our country also?
How about homeowners insurance?

We are talking about boat insurance
But I am pretty sure our home insurance is not worldwide underwritten.

 

[garbler]

As my previous post states Lloyds is not an insurance company or underwriter. Lloyds is an association of underwriting investors both primary and reinsure. It is centuries old and has over time written standards and specs for marine risks. Lloyds standards for construction and commercial vessels are an amalgamation of the best. To be Lloyds certified is worth money both in hull value and insurance costs.

Rick

Rick

 

[BruceK]

Lloyds carriers are often syndicates of "names". Getting instructions during a court case when fortunes can wax and wane was often impossible. Decisions made initially seemed hewn in stone no matter what,perhaps due to the difficulty of getting all members to reconsider issues arising. I wouldn`t be surprised how much reinsurance they hold, something over which the insured has no control or privity, but as primary insurer, not necessarily my first choice.


Some areas of Australia are effectively uninsurable, either blanket or economically, as a consequence of repeated east coast flooding.

It`s entirely possible many Australian houses are worldwide underwritten, at least for reinsurance purposes, generally and for disaster. Like horse racing bookmakers laying off the odds.

 

[Simi 60]

As my previous post states Lloyds is not an insurance company or underwriter. Lloyds is an association of underwriting investors both primary and reinsure.

Rick

Lloyds carriers are often syndicates of "names"s.

All I know is in the fine print it had Lloyds listed as underwriters

 

[Hippocampus]

Ok, I give up
What's MMCC.


Mobile Mini Circus Children?
https://mmccglobal.org/climate-action/

Mary MacKillop Catholic College?
Monday Morning Cooking Club,?
Mandalorian Mercs Costume Club?
Margaret Morrison Carnegie College?

I thought my google skills were up there.

Man made climate change

 

[Hippocampus]

It’s fascinating to read about the origins of Lloyd’s going back to its coffee house days.

Beyond insurance issues now wondering about whether the AICW is usable. Know in spite of Desantis voting against storm relief as a congressman Biden has put up money and resources for FLA. My concern is more for the more northerly portions of the ICW between Georgia and Virginia. Suspect restoring land infrastructure will come first and clearing/dredging the ICW way down the list of priorities.
So think us snowbirders have a lot to think about with little information. Did find WaterwayGuide somewhat helpful posting what they know.

 

[O C Diver]

I
If you are taking premiums and not having thousands of boats wiped out by hurricanes, simple maths and logic says it's profitable.

So the simple answer is that you think it's profitable, but you don't know. Apparently no record of claims paid versus premiums (less company expenses) collected.

States in America have laws that tightly regulate the insurance industry and how much profit (premiums versus losses) they can make. Find it hard to imagine that Australia doesn't regulate the insurance industry similarly. Does your government turn a blind eye to premiums versus claims?

Ted

 

[Hippocampus]

From what I understand insurance companies make most if not all their profits from their investment portfolios. They get a bunch of premium money which is promptly invested. That’s where the profit comes from. So the longer it takes to make payouts the longer it stays in their portfolio and the more income. Also they need sufficient reserves so at any given moment a small percentage of their total reserves is in play for payouts. Right now think they’re getting a double whammy. Income from investments is down and payouts are going up.
When I was doing international rallies a couple times a year a bunch of us thought about forming our own association to self insure. A member was much smarter than the rest of us. Although we could probably generate ~100 memberships we had no where close to the numbers or reserves to make the thing work. Each member would have to put in 5 digits yearly for a few years with no major claims in the group to build up sufficient reserves. Only then would there be a equilibrium between payouts and premiums. Even then if there were many people making claims we’d be overwhelmed. Given it was a fleet all going at the same time to the same place likelihood of that happening was greater. Insurance companies are huge for a reason. Reinsurance is common for a reason. They need to minimize risk or go out of business. Just raising rates isn’t enough to remain viable.

 

[Rufus]

I keep seeing video of the same few marinas on the news....often from different viewing angles. I wonder about the actual extent of damage to larger cruising boats. I also wonder about the judgement of owners who left them there.

 

[danderer]

Insurance companies are not getting rich off premiums. In most cases their premiums collected match their claims paid, and their profit comes from their investments. They collect a bunch of money...hold it for a while....then pay it out as claims. Their profits come from the "hold it for a while" portion of their business model.

Thank you. Precisely right. And with the low interest rates of the past few years the investment side of things have been generating less income.

The notion that they're raking in the bucks off the backs of us poor folks just isn't accurate.

As in any industry there are good and bad players when it comes to customer service.

 

[ranger58sb]

I also wonder about the judgement of owners who left them there.

Imagine yourself in Ft. Myers several days before Ian landfall... which was at the time predicted to be Tampa area.

At a marina with decent floating docks and a pretty OK track record.

With few places available for haul-out, high enough to handle expected storm surge and with and effective anchoring, most already spoken-for under hurricane planning contract.

Where would you go? When would you have left? Up river and into the Lake would be an option, maybe... but otherwise? And even if you went into the lake, then what?

And then there are the absentee owners... dependent on local support... most of which is already over-subscribed...

We were in Legacy Harbour for June/July 2021... with a dead boat (engine work underway, but not usable). Towing options were limited, and there weren't really viable places to tow to. Given that experience, I can imagine many (most?) owners just couldn't find or execute a viable Plan B...

-Chris

 

[backinblue]

Ranger, I agree. There is really no feasible way to haul every boat in a given area in a couple day's time.

 

[DDW]

States in America have laws that tightly regulate the insurance industry and how much profit (premiums versus losses) they can make.

Actually it's premiums - (losses + admin). And that last is the huge end run around the regulations. As an example in CA prior to Obamacare, the similarly regulated health insurance industry had some actors running admin costs in the 30+% range. Included in admin costs were things like luxury boxes at sports stadiums, private jets for junkets, huge executive salaries, etc. These were companies registered as "non-profits".

That said, I insure my boats at about 0.3% of their agreed value per year. That assumes an actuarial loss rate of once every 300 years. Or alternatively, each year they pay for one boat out of every 300 they insure. While I complain when I write the check, rationally it seems a fair rate. Of course, not in a hurricane area.

 

[O C Diver]

That said, I insure my boats at about 0.3% of their agreed value per year. That assumes an actuarial loss rate of once every 300 years. Or alternatively, each year they pay for one boat out of every 300 they insure. While I complain when I write the check, rationally it seems a fair rate. Of course, not in a hurricane area.

My policy is 1% of agreed value with the requirement to be North of Savannah, GA during Hurricane season. It includes an extensive cruising area of the Great lakes, out to Montreal, the Bahamas, and West to New Orleans. I consider that very reasonable considering my home dock is in Fort Myers.

Ted

 

[Rufus]

Imagine yourself in Ft. Myers several days before Ian landfall...

-Chris

I couldn't imagine my boat being anywhere near Florida during hurricane season. That's the point. If my insurance goes up one cent as a result of this mess, I'm gonna be pissed!

 

[ranger58sb]

I couldn't imagine my boat being anywhere near Florida during hurricane season.

Sure, especially easy if you're a Great Lakes boater.

But if you live in Florida, you might want to keep your boat there. Bazillions of Florida boaters do. And boaters from inland GA/SC/TN/AL/etc.

And if you keep it one the FL coast but live inland, you may not be able to go through the process very easily... especially if you're already doing the same for your house.

I think my main thought is just that there may not be all that many boaters down there percentage-wise (?) who are just fine with the "insurance will cover it" approach. It's just not an easy one to solve.

FWIW, Florida isn't the only target. We sometimes have to deal with hurricanes here along the Chesapeake, too. And the same conditions somewhat apply, especially to absentee owners (e.g., boat in the Bay, home on the other side of D.C. somewhere).

Might be nice enough up there, but I wouldn't want to have to keep our boat in the Great Lakes...

-Chris

 

[Rufus]

Sure, especially easy if you're a Great Lakes boater.

But if you live in Florida, you might want to keep your boat there. Bazillions of Florida boaters do. And boaters from inland GA/SC/TN/AL/etc.

And if you keep it one the FL coast but live inland, you may not be able to go through the process very easily... especially if you're already doing the same for your house.

I think my main thought is just that there may not be all that many boaters down there percentage-wise (?) who are just fine with the "insurance will cover it" approach. It's just not an easy one to solve.

FWIW, Florida isn't the only target. We sometimes have to deal with hurricanes here along the Chesapeake, too. And the same conditions somewhat apply, especially to absentee owners (e.g., boat in the Bay, home on the other side of D.C. somewhere).

Might be nice enough up there, but I wouldn't want to have to keep our boat in the Great Lakes...

-Chris

...starting to sound like Florida/Gulf Coast/Chesapeake boaters should get a special insurance subsidy...maybe a government bailout.... There's a related thread about Markel insurance having a "wind" clause in their policies. They're on the right track. (Great company, by the way).

P.S. The Great Lakes suck....definitely don't go there.

 

[dannc]

Imagine yourself in Ft. Myers several days before Ian landfall... which was at the time predicted to be Tampa area.

At a marina with decent floating docks and a pretty OK track record.

With few places available for haul-out, high enough to handle expected storm surge and with and effective anchoring, most already spoken-for under hurricane planning contract.

Where would you go? When would you have left? Up river and into the Lake would be an option, maybe... but otherwise? And even if you went into the lake, then what?

And then there are the absentee owners... dependent on local support... most of which is already over-subscribed...
...

And, if one has a home, does one prepare the home for the storm or the boat? If one's home is going to be flooded and/or the area devastated and one has to evacuate the area, there is almost certainly is no time to worry with the boat.

I had to evacuate for Andrew and it took 4-6 hours to move a distance that would normally take an hour or so. Had family that evacuated for another storm and took them two days to get out of Florida due to the traffic jams. There are only two Interstates and the Turnpike to move millions of people from the south end of Florida to the north. There are a few back roads but they are not really going to help move millions. My family knows about the back roads, used them, and they were still bottle necked at the Interstates and Turnpike.

If one has to evacuate one has to leave early or risk being stuck on the road when the storm hits. The problem with Ian was that the landfall kept changing which made the decision to evacuate harder and left less time if one decided to evacuate.

Is the Lake a good hurricane hole? Seems like the lake would have steep, short waves due to the shallows and the fetch is pretty good. The rim canal is deep but I have always assumed that the bottom is shell rock or a bit of sand over shell rock.

Later,
Dan

 

[ranger58sb]

...starting to sound like Florida/Gulf Coast/Chesapeake boaters should get a special insurance subsidy...maybe a government bailout....

I don't think so, Tim.



For the most part, insurance in Florida is already a pay-through-the-nose proposition. When we had to be in Florida last Summer, our insurance we much higher than what it could have been up here. I think it was just under 1% of agreed value, for that period.

I don't know how our Chesapeake rates (ours is currently approx .6% of agreed value, now) compare to the rest of the country...

Just another boating cost, with where you boat being a factor... unless you can self-insure...

-Chris

 

[ranger58sb]

Is the Lake a good hurricane hole? Seems like the lake would have steep, short waves due to the shallows and the fetch is pretty good. The rim canal is deep but I have always assumed that the bottom is shell rock or a bit of sand over shell rock.

Don't know. And don't know what you'd do when you get there.

I read there was a procession of boats leaving Ft. Myers in advance, but I think there are only a few marina options, and it's not like that those slips would be empty already.

When we went through Lake Okeechobee in Aug '21 there was some canal area first, then I think I remember what looked like at least one decent hurricane marina location. I dunno what their docks are like, though, and whether they'd really have available space for a horde of boats from Ft. Myers on short notice.

I think there might also come a time when USACE closes the locks...

-Chris

 

[Comodave]

Sure, especially easy if you're a Great Lakes boater.

But if you live in Florida, you might want to keep your boat there. Bazillions of Florida boaters do. And boaters from inland GA/SC/TN/AL/etc.

And if you keep it one the FL coast but live inland, you may not be able to go through the process very easily... especially if you're already doing the same for your house.

I think my main thought is just that there may not be all that many boaters down there percentage-wise (?) who are just fine with the "insurance will cover it" approach. It's just not an easy one to solve.

FWIW, Florida isn't the only target. We sometimes have to deal with hurricanes here along the Chesapeake, too. And the same conditions somewhat apply, especially to absentee owners (e.g., boat in the Bay, home on the other side of D.C. somewhere).

Might be nice enough up there, but I wouldn't want to have to keep our boat in the Great Lakes...

-Chris

We live on the Great Lakes and actually love it. No rust from salt water. No harsh south Florida sun. Nothing in the water that will eat you. Yes we do have winter but that is when we get lots of work done on the boat. No hurricanes. Lower insurance rates. We get to dock our boat right behind our house. Lots of great things here.

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Mr. C. Regards your post #55...

 

[Rufus]

We live on the Great Lakes and actually love it. No rust from salt water. No harsh south Florida sun. Nothing in the water that will eat you. Yes we do have winter but that is when we get lots of work done on the boat. No hurricanes. Lower insurance rates. We get to dock our boat right behind our house. Lots of great things here.

Don't tell them that! Next thing you know there will be an influx of out-of-state boats clogging already crowded facilities! Read my lips....the Great Lakes suck.

 

[O C Diver]

We live on the Great Lakes and actually love it. No rust from salt water. No harsh south Florida sun. Nothing in the water that will eat you. Yes we do have winter but that is when we get lots of work done on the boat. No hurricanes. Lower insurance rates. We get to dock our boat right behind our house. Lots of great things here.

Boating on the Great Lakes is superb, provided you only want to do it 4 months a year and spend a small fortune protecting your boat from subzero temperatures. And then there are the storms. Atleast you get about 5 days to prepare for a hurricane. Weather forecasting in the Great Lakes is best described as current conditions, not forecasting.

Ted

 

[rslifkin]

Boating on the Great Lakes is superb, provided you only want to do it 4 months a year and spend a small fortune protecting your boat from subzero temperatures. And then there are the storms. Atleast you get about 5 days to prepare for a hurricane. Weather forecasting in the Great Lakes is best described as current conditions, not forecasting.

Ted

We get a longer season on the lower lakes. At least 5 good months, if not 6 depending on cold tolerance and luck with weather. We're in the water for close to 7 months, but we stretch the season longer than many. Winterizing and winter storage is definitely a cost though.

 

[Simi 60]

I don't think so, Tim.



For the most part, insurance in Florida is already a pay-through-the-nose proposition. When we had to be in Florida last Summer, our insurance we much higher than what it could have been up here. I think it was just under 1% of agreed value, for that period.

I don't know how our Chesapeake rates (ours is currently approx .6% of agreed value, now) compare to the rest of the country...

Just another boating cost, with where you boat being a factor... unless you can self-insure...

-Chris

1% ?
Luxury, that was the Dreamtime back in the 90's for us.

We currently pay about 3% of insured value.