For more than 19 years, I have provided insurance programs to clubs based in the marina. If I had to ask this question to a room full of insurers and insurance brokers operating in this specialized segment, I am sure there would be a deafening cry as each one tried to state that his own pet policy or policy was the best . Insurance option for sailing, yacht, cruise and any other marine club. There will be a variety of whistles, bells and other rinks, without any doubt represented from the provider's point of view instead of a sailing club. After all, sellers have something to sell and rarely are able to resist the opportunity to sell, even when they are as scared as this demand to sell heroic proportions, which is generally It means shouting even stronger.
It is almost the same scenario when it comes to insurance marketing in this specialized part of the marine leisure industry. There is a lot of noise from a growing number of participants with each of which attempts to draw attention to be noisier than all others. Very noisy, but very little in the form of differentiation and everyone offers "personalized" coverage with many "unique" features. How is the committee of a sailing club on Earth deciding exactly what is the best option for your club and its members?
In this context, in April of this year, the Royal Yachting Association (RYA) announced changes to the insurance requirements of approved training centers: Public Responsibility (PL) that was # 39 ; it will increase to a minimum compensation limit of £ 3,000,000 and, most importantly, the approved centers should cover 500,000 £ of professional compensation coverage (PI) in respect to their training activities.
Prima Facie looked like a sensible move. First of all, although, in the last years, the tendency of "compensation reduction" has seen that the limits of the PL have been piling up in the last years, at the moment it is It considers that the limit of PL of £ 3,000,000 is the least sensitive to carry. Secondly, professional services, including "advice", are expressly excluded in normal declarations of PL insurances (including maritime leisure policies) where a quota is provided and, obviously, when it's # 39 Provide training to pay, one might expect some advice to be given by an instructor. Therefore, training and counseling are normally insured in an IP policy, so the new requirement seemed a sensible measure.
You can only speculate how they received the announcement of the new requirements for the training centers, particularly the non-profit sailing clubs for which each pound is counted. An increase in the PL insurance up to a limit of 3 million pounds would probably not break the bank, but the PI may have been something else. First of all, the IP in the marine sector can be expensive, even for relatively low limits of coverage due to the market's limited appetite. Second, when vulnerable children and / or adults engage in activities, the gain in the market is further decreasing creating a shorter amount that could lead to even higher prices.
If the clubs received the news less than enthusiastically, they wondered how certain insurers and insurance brokers could have reacted to the possibility of announcing a change of game, for exactly the same reasons as previously. Insurers because PI is an anathema to many of them and, service brokers, because access to a market prepared to offer pleasant rates in exchange for the required coverage area would not be easy.
Without any doubt, everyone breathed a great sigh of it when, just five months later, in September, the RYA announced that professional indemnity insurance would not be a requirement after so much that the center's public liability insurance policy would cover an extension that covered its training. activities that include compensation for bodily injury to participants.
Consult a thorough exploration of the small print of the interested parties to ensure that they meet the following requirements that will have to be implemented as of February 1, 2016:
"The purpose of public liability insurance is to indemnify the RTC and its instructors when a third party (who may be a student, client or member of the public) suffers personal injury or property damage as a result of the RTC or of the instructor, negligent acts or omissions, and the RTC and / or its instructors are obligated to defend and / or pay damages to the injured person, therefore, the RTC must ensure that any instructor employed or contracted directly by the RTC is covered by the RTC public. Civil liability insurance policy: RTC public liability insurance must be extended to indemnify the RTC and its instructors when the negligent advice or instructions given by RTC or its instructors cause personal injury or other damages or losses and the RTC and / or its instructors are required to defend the claim and / or pay damages "(Notify Training program RYA TN of September 7, 2015).
With help, the statement tells everyone exactly what is the goal of PL coverage. How can you delete this with the exclusions of training and advice? Well, insurance companies have addressed it in several ways. One, for example, maintains that whenever indicating "training" within the company description in its coverage calendar, explicit exclusion from its writing will not apply to the affected club or center . Another applies what I consider a "safer" option for the club by providing a specific endorsement that confirms that the license plate is covered.
Therefore, everything is fine: the center is compensated in case of injuries to third parties caused by negligent acts or omissions by their instructors regarding the advice and instructions that are provided. If? Well, in reality, not necessarily.
Remember all those insurance companies and insurance brokers who previously called on who had the best features and advantages? It's time to chop your teeth and hear what some of them have to say, especially about "Body Injury." An insurer defines physical injuries such as "death, illness, disease or nervous shock." Another defines it simply to include "Death, injury or illness" Still a third party like "All physical injuries of a third party, including death, illness, illness, mental injury, anguish or shock derivatives of this physical injury ".
If you have not agreed, you could see the subtle differences between the three definitions. The first includes Nervous Shock, but what exactly is this? Well, the legal definition of Shock Nervous is a mental condition that extends beyond pain or emotional distress to a recognized mental illness. This contrasts with the third example that includes mental injuries, anguish or shock that are not conditions as advanced as the Nervous Shock and, therefore, can provide a better coverage of coverage as if any of the conditions described progressed to a mental illness, the coverage would still be maintained. be effective For its part, the first does not state that the nervous shock must result from a physical injury, while the third example will only deal with mental injury, anguish or shock (and illness or illness) if it results from a physical injury. The second definition does not provide coverage for any form of anxiety or mental illness.
Which option do you prefer or even care about you, your club or your members? At the end of the day, everyone seems to "check the box" until it is the intention of the RYA.
However, we must consider the intention of the insurance. Is it a matter of compensating the club, the center and the instructors in case of injuries derived from their own training (that is, during the real instruction inside and outside the water) or something else? What about the effectiveness of training? What happens if someone is injured or injured several months after training and says it as a result of a mistake or omission during the training? In this case, the club or center almost certainly would not have any protection of your public liability insurance.
In addition, the statement of the training notification RYA TN 07-15 (previous) requests coverage with respect to "other damages or losses". While damage to third-party property may normally be caused, presumably, "other loss" means some form of loss (for example, purely financial) that is not an injury or damage that, in fact, would not be covered by the PL section and would normally require an IP. policy of protection of this type of responsibility.
Let's look at a couple of other scenarios that may affect the clubs and their committees:
Imagine that there is an incident in a club or center where someone under training is seriously injured and the center is processed by the health and safety executive (HSE). What would happen if the coverage of the PL you thought would cover you for £ 3 million has an internal limit of £ 50,000 for HSE legal fees and does not cover any premiums? Soon 50,000 pounds are paid in legal fees. But, hey, the cover "ticks in the box."
In addition, after the incident, the HSE not only pursues the legal entity that is the center of training, but also pursues the directors and / or officers of the club itself. There is no protection with regard to your PL insurance, not even for legal expenses.
A club committee decides to take the step to expel a member who subsequently decides to take legal action against the club; If a volunteer or club employee sues a club for harassment or discrimination, a group of members decide to take legal action against club officials because they feel that the officers have not acted in the best interests of the club or its members. Next, we see more examples in which there is no protection for the club or its officers under the club's PL insurance, but it does "check the box".
The insurance that "marca la caixa" can have a small price, often a driver for a club that seeks an economic solution, but will not offer the free protection of breaches that the club's officers could want in the 21st century.
5 Questions The administrators and officers of the Club Nautico have to ask before deciding which is the best insurance for sailing clubs
1. What are the long-term goals of my club and partners?
2. If you are pursuing the club how would you finance your defense?
3. If the club had compensation awards against him outside the scope of his Public Liability Insurance, how would he obtain these prizes?
4. How would you defend the allegations and accusations made against me for decisions, errors and omissions made as a club officer?
5. Do I want to put my personal assets at risk, during my period of office as a club official or after setting me up?
These are just a handful of questions you can ask as a club official to help you determine in what sphere of protection you may wish to invest to achieve the goals of your club, its members and, in fact, yourselves. For some, these aspects will be important, others will be considered irrelevant and, if they are important, the concept of value will often cancel the final price.
The value, of course, is in the eyes of the viewer, but, nevertheless, it would endanger me that the solution "Better value" is a program totally aligned with your goals, subscribed for good security and delivered with it best price available. that is, the best insurance for your sailing club. The differences in definitions in policy writing, as well as the variation in the scope of the aforementioned coverage, suggest that a single policy "off the board" that offers a unique solution that adapts to any option that Anything that is personalized may not necessarily be the best option for your club or center.