FYI
Moderators: bman, Chalk, Tom Keels
-
Breambuster
- Posts: 258
- Joined: March 13th, 2007, 1:18 pm
Re: FYI
Got a positive response this afternoon, after going almost all the way to the end of the chain of command. Still dont have it in writing........but will give ya'll an update when the check arrived.
Re: FYI
Wow, BB, sorry about your trouble. Glad you got insurance to pay so hopefully your boat will be fixed soon.I look at my fire extinguisher and check the gauge every time I go out, but never thought about something happening like you had.
Yours in the South
-
Breambuster
- Posts: 258
- Joined: March 13th, 2007, 1:18 pm
Re: FYI
Guys, here's the update.
The bottom line is that they agreed to pay for the repair after I send the letter below to the GA state manager. Its an aggravation but I really cant say anything bad about almost everyone I had to deal with, and therefore have decided to not reveal the name of the insurance company. Like they say, hate the game but not the players. I suspect I have to go through similar hoops if I were to deal with another insurance company. One last thing I do want to say is that Huggins has been a tremendous help throughout the entire fiasco. They have totally earned my business.
RE: Claim #XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Dear Mr. XXXXXXX,
I would like to first bring to your attention that my boat (HIN:XXXXXXXXXXX) has been insured with comprehensive coverage under XXXX Insurance since 2007 with zero claims until now. On x/x/2011, the outboard engine sustained major accidental fire damage. After the fire was extinguished, I was able to restart the engine and idled back to the Keaton Beach Marina, FL.
According to certified Mercury mechanics at Huggins Marina in Albany, GA, the voltage regulator overheated, resulting in a fire which caused almost $x,xxx worth of damage to the engine (see attached letter and estimate from Huggins Marina).
I’ve received a copy of the adjustment estimate on x/xx/2011, which indicated that XXXXXXX Insurance would only cover the repair/replacement for the Flywheel cover and Rubber starter mounts, totaling $134.67. From our conversation yesterday, it appeared that my repair claim was denied because of the Exclusion #8 on Part 4 of the policy (page16 on the Policy Booklet). Essentially, according to you, it’s the opinion of XXXXXXX Insurance that “the whole electrical system failed” and therefore XXXXXXX will not pay for the electrical components that were damaged.
I strongly disagree with the current claims adjuster’s estimate on the repair. I believe the damages sustained due to the accidental fire are covered in my insurance policy because of the following reasons;
1. XXX XXXXX, the claim adjuster who inspected the boat in person, informed me on x/x/11 that the fire was due to an overheated voltage regulator and that XXXXXXX Insurance will cover all the damages except the voltage regulator, its installation and $63 in deductable (see attached Insurance Claim Log). His assessment did not indicate that the whole electrical system has failed.
2. In the policy booklet, Part 4 (page 14), it stated that “fire” is covered for premium coverage. It did not specify that fire due to the combustion of electrical components as exclusion.
3. You mentioned that Exclusion #8 under Part 4, section d (page 16 on the booklet) as the reason why XXXXXXX will not cover all damaged electrical components. I believe the damage on all the electrical components, except the faulty voltage regulator, do NOT apply to Exclusion #8 in Part 4 of the policy booklet because they were “subsequent loss by fire”. Both XXX XXXXX and mechanics at Huggins Marina agreed that only the voltage regulator overheated and caught on fire. I’m absolutely certain that other electrical components were still in proper working order at the time the fire broke out. The fact that we were able to restart the engine after the fire was extinguished and idled back to the marina overwhelmingly refutes XXXXXXXXX's assumption that “the whole electrical system failed”. Based on this fact alone, it is proof that the electrical components such as the starter motor, ignition coil, etc. are still in working order. The attached pictures supports my contention that they were damaged due to heat combustion and not to electrical failure.
4. Huggins Marina has repaired an outboard engine that sustained the same fire damage caused by an overheated voltage regulator (see attached document 2). The damage was almost identical to what sustained on my boat and the record from Huggins Marina showed that XXXXXX Insurance approved payment on the repair. I understand that the policy may have changed. However, I’ve also found an identical accident occurred on July of 2010 reported on an internet boating forum and accordingly XXXXX Insurance covered all the damage (http://forums.iboats.com/XXXXXXXXXX). I’m now contacting the boat owner to obtained detailed information on the accident and what XXXXXXXX Insurance covered on his repair.
In closing, I believe that I have provided strong justification that the fire damage sustained on my boat is covered under my comprehensive coverage policy with XXXXXXXX Insurance and sincerely hope that we can come to an agreement that will give XXXXXX Insurance another vote in the “happy customer” department. I look forward to your response.
The bottom line is that they agreed to pay for the repair after I send the letter below to the GA state manager. Its an aggravation but I really cant say anything bad about almost everyone I had to deal with, and therefore have decided to not reveal the name of the insurance company. Like they say, hate the game but not the players. I suspect I have to go through similar hoops if I were to deal with another insurance company. One last thing I do want to say is that Huggins has been a tremendous help throughout the entire fiasco. They have totally earned my business.
RE: Claim #XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Dear Mr. XXXXXXX,
I would like to first bring to your attention that my boat (HIN:XXXXXXXXXXX) has been insured with comprehensive coverage under XXXX Insurance since 2007 with zero claims until now. On x/x/2011, the outboard engine sustained major accidental fire damage. After the fire was extinguished, I was able to restart the engine and idled back to the Keaton Beach Marina, FL.
According to certified Mercury mechanics at Huggins Marina in Albany, GA, the voltage regulator overheated, resulting in a fire which caused almost $x,xxx worth of damage to the engine (see attached letter and estimate from Huggins Marina).
I’ve received a copy of the adjustment estimate on x/xx/2011, which indicated that XXXXXXX Insurance would only cover the repair/replacement for the Flywheel cover and Rubber starter mounts, totaling $134.67. From our conversation yesterday, it appeared that my repair claim was denied because of the Exclusion #8 on Part 4 of the policy (page16 on the Policy Booklet). Essentially, according to you, it’s the opinion of XXXXXXX Insurance that “the whole electrical system failed” and therefore XXXXXXX will not pay for the electrical components that were damaged.
I strongly disagree with the current claims adjuster’s estimate on the repair. I believe the damages sustained due to the accidental fire are covered in my insurance policy because of the following reasons;
1. XXX XXXXX, the claim adjuster who inspected the boat in person, informed me on x/x/11 that the fire was due to an overheated voltage regulator and that XXXXXXX Insurance will cover all the damages except the voltage regulator, its installation and $63 in deductable (see attached Insurance Claim Log). His assessment did not indicate that the whole electrical system has failed.
2. In the policy booklet, Part 4 (page 14), it stated that “fire” is covered for premium coverage. It did not specify that fire due to the combustion of electrical components as exclusion.
3. You mentioned that Exclusion #8 under Part 4, section d (page 16 on the booklet) as the reason why XXXXXXX will not cover all damaged electrical components. I believe the damage on all the electrical components, except the faulty voltage regulator, do NOT apply to Exclusion #8 in Part 4 of the policy booklet because they were “subsequent loss by fire”. Both XXX XXXXX and mechanics at Huggins Marina agreed that only the voltage regulator overheated and caught on fire. I’m absolutely certain that other electrical components were still in proper working order at the time the fire broke out. The fact that we were able to restart the engine after the fire was extinguished and idled back to the marina overwhelmingly refutes XXXXXXXXX's assumption that “the whole electrical system failed”. Based on this fact alone, it is proof that the electrical components such as the starter motor, ignition coil, etc. are still in working order. The attached pictures supports my contention that they were damaged due to heat combustion and not to electrical failure.
4. Huggins Marina has repaired an outboard engine that sustained the same fire damage caused by an overheated voltage regulator (see attached document 2). The damage was almost identical to what sustained on my boat and the record from Huggins Marina showed that XXXXXX Insurance approved payment on the repair. I understand that the policy may have changed. However, I’ve also found an identical accident occurred on July of 2010 reported on an internet boating forum and accordingly XXXXX Insurance covered all the damage (http://forums.iboats.com/XXXXXXXXXX). I’m now contacting the boat owner to obtained detailed information on the accident and what XXXXXXXX Insurance covered on his repair.
In closing, I believe that I have provided strong justification that the fire damage sustained on my boat is covered under my comprehensive coverage policy with XXXXXXXX Insurance and sincerely hope that we can come to an agreement that will give XXXXXX Insurance another vote in the “happy customer” department. I look forward to your response.
Re: FYI
Isn't it standard procedure for insurance companies to deny the claim the first time? Glad you fought it out. 