Osmosis and insurance
Jimbo
mentioned that he had spotted a few blisters on her hull whilst she
was out of the water. Whilst no survey has been done, it seems likely
that this is osmosis.
My question is, for a £5k boat, what view will an insurer take on this
? I tried to get an answer from St Margaret's, but ended up stuck with
some guy who could only tell me that "obviously you should have a
survey" over and over and seemed unable or unwilling to answer the
question or forward me anyone who could.
James.
Rainer Thonnes
"Jimbo" <Ja...@nospamjyconsulting.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3db56b1c...@news.freeserve.net...
That was the right answer, I'm afraid. You'll find it difficult to find an
insurer to take on a boat without a survey, unless perhaps it's with
the boat's existing insurer. The osmosis itself, if any, is unlikely to
make that much difference, especially on Hurleys which are built like
the proverbial tank.
Jimbo
>insurer to take on a boat without a survey, unless perhaps it's with
>the boat's existing insurer. The osmosis itself, if any, is unlikely to
>make that much difference, especially on Hurleys which are built like
>the proverbial tank.
Sheesh, you don't work for St Margaret's do you :-) ?
I've every intention of having a survey, i was more concerned with the
impact that osmosis would have.
James.
Tony of Judicious
osmosis. I wouldn't worry too much on a Hurley. IMHO surveyors want it treated with epoxy so as to
transfer their responsibility to International and Blakes who offer a guarantee - although I have no
facts to back this up.
Tony Howard
www.yacht-judicious.co.uk
TonyB
"Tony of Judicious" <po...@thoward.plus.com> wrote in message
news:3j1brukua9dg4cvql...@4ax.com...
Just been doing some research on this. It appears that blisters up to 1" are
best left alone. Up to 4" probably won't affect the structural integrity of
the hull. Over 4" will. Don't buy if blisters are over 1". Don't attempt
repairs or buy a boat that has been repaired. Some repairs are OK but many
are not, and it just ain't worth the risk. 3M certainly don't guarantee
their product and I bet Blakes don't either if you look at the small print,
even if they do I wouldn't fancy trying to get any money off them in the
event of a claim, would you?
Apparently many, many boats have this blistering problem which can be used
to try to negotiate the price down, but it's due to poor materials used in
the construction in the first place, some resins are crap apparently. Then
repairs on top of crap is just making it worse. Badly repaired boats are
worth less than cheap chips. Good repairs can only be done by (expensive)
experts.
Conclusion either buy blisters and live with them or look for a virgin
bottom!
TonyB
Hugo 'NOx' Tyson
Ja...@nospamjyconsulting.fsnet.co.uk (Jimbo) writes:
> [a little osmosis]
>
> My question is, for a £5k boat, what view will an insurer take on this?
> I tried to get an answer from St Margaret's, but ended up stuck with some
> guy who could only tell me that "obviously you should have a survey" over
> and over and seemed unable or unwilling to answer the question or forward
> me anyone who could.
For a 5k boat, get third party only insurance, eg. from Bishop Skinner for
40 quid. No survey needed. It does include "recovery of the wreck" which
would potentially be a large expense if you lose it where it's a hazard.
- Huge
Stefan Lloyd
"> That was the right answer, I'm afraid. You'll find it difficult to find
an
> insurer to take on a boat without a survey, unless perhaps it's with
> the boat's existing insurer.
That has not been my experience. I've had two insurers for my boat (24 foot
fibreglass day-racer) and neither has wanted a survey.
Rainer Thonnes
news:ap5gvo$sg5$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk...
A day-racer probably comes under a classification similar to dinghies,
which, I think, don't ever require surveys.
In other words I'm telling you that what you have isn't a boat. :-)
I should have said "yacht", not "boat". Sorry.
Jimbo
>A day-racer probably comes under a classification similar to dinghies,
>which, I think, don't ever require surveys.
>
>In other words I'm telling you that what you have isn't a boat. :-)
>
>I should have said "yacht", not "boat". Sorry.
The view seems to vary. My first boat was a Corribee, and no survey
was ever asked for. My second was a Jaguar 25, and they were happy to
accept a 5 year old survey.
Although i've never had any problems, i'm a little wary now, as i
think the Hurley 22 will be with me for sometime (bought the Jaguar 25
so i coud sail it with the kids, but they aren't really that keen).
Jimbo.
Anjo Sterringa
I have third party insurance only as well- no survey needed of course.
For an old boat it is mostly not cost effective to insure any more. My
boat, Puma34 is a 1975 sloop- with a badly don osmosis job but with a
very thick hull.
Unlike other people reacting, I do not see a problem with a boat with
blisters providing you know the brand and that it is solidly built.
Did a first, superficial osmosis treatment (we only sanded the
blisters, no drying out) on a Westerly Conway, the family boat which
has done well for over 20 years before getting some blisters back.
Surveyor did not see this as a problem.
Am doing my osmosis treatment now on the Puma, drying her out for a
long time. It is NOT true that the work can only be done by
professionals- as a boatowner you are probably more conscientious
applying coats and coats of epoxy. (eg check out info on West System
epoxies)
Anjo Sterringa.
Graham Frankland
"TonyB" <p...@q.com> wrote in message news:ap48rc$9cq$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
>Some repairs are OK but many
> are not, and it just ain't worth the risk. 3M certainly don't guarantee
> their product and I bet Blakes don't either if you look at the small
print,
> even if they do I wouldn't fancy trying to get any money off them in the
> event of a claim, would you?
>
Blakes, West and Gelshield all have 5 year underwritten guarantees some of
which, following an inspection, can be extended for further periods.
> Apparently many, many boats have this blistering problem which can be used
> to try to negotiate the price down, but it's due to poor materials used in
> the construction in the first place, some resins are crap apparently. Then
> repairs on top of crap is just making it worse. Badly repaired boats are
> worth less than cheap chips. Good repairs can only be done by (expensive)
> experts.
>
> Conclusion either buy blisters and live with them or look for a virgin
> bottom!
>
I don't know where you've acquired this information but it's misleading.
Many old hulls built prior to the introduction of isophthalic resins suffer
from osmosis but, it has yet to sink a boat. It's often caused by badly
wetted out mat leaving voids, not by bad materials. To say that good
repairs can only be done by "experts" is bullshit, lots of people do their
own treatment and, if it's supervised properly, it's as good as any
professional job.
On surveys I've had done, blisters have merely reduced the insured value but
not presented a safety issue for insurers.
Graham.
Ian Sandell
<gdf...@nospam.globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
>I don't know where you've acquired this information but it's misleading.
>Many old hulls built prior to the introduction of isophthalic resins suffer
>from osmosis but, it has yet to sink a boat.
I think this is the real issue. Many boats never have a good
inspection from one decade to the next, yet there is as far as I know
no recorded case of a boat sinking from osmosis.
There is now a large, self generating, vested interest, industry that
wants to find and then treat (at large cost) osmosis in every boat it
can.
I recnetly saw a Centaur with numberous pinhead size blisters. The
owner was persauded to spend several thousand pounds having full
gelcoat removal and epoxy treatment.
Ian
TonyB
"Graham Frankland" <gdf...@nospam.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Y7Wdnb1YMop...@brightview.com...> Snip> >
>
> Blakes, West and Gelshield all have 5 year underwritten guarantees some of
> which, following an inspection, can be extended for further periods.
What *exactly* does the guarantee say?
>
> > Apparently many, many boats have this blistering problem which can be
used
> > to try to negotiate the price down, but it's due to poor materials used
in
> > the construction in the first place, some resins are crap apparently.
Then
> > repairs on top of crap is just making it worse. Badly repaired boats are
> > worth less than cheap chips. Good repairs can only be done by
(expensive)
> > experts.
> >
> > Conclusion either buy blisters and live with them or look for a virgin
> > bottom!
> >
> I don't know where you've acquired this information but it's misleading.
> Many old hulls built prior to the introduction of isophthalic resins
suffer
> from osmosis but, it has yet to sink a boat.
That's exactly what I said - small blisters are OK, but anything over 4" is
likely to compromise the hull strength. That means "may sink the boat"
It's often caused by badly
> wetted out mat leaving voids, not by bad materials. To say that good
> repairs can only be done by "experts" is bullshit, lots of people do their
> own treatment and, if it's supervised properly, it's as good as any
> professional job.
If it has to be supervised that implies by an expert which is exactly what I
said. But I also said that badly repaired boats are not worth much - like
badly repaired anything.
>
> On surveys I've had done, blisters have merely reduced the insured value
but
> not presented a safety issue for insurers.
Had any bigger than 4"??
TonyB
>
>
>
TonyB
>
> >I don't know where you've acquired this information but it's misleading.
> >Many old hulls built prior to the introduction of isophthalic resins
suffer
> >from osmosis but, it has yet to sink a boat.
>
> I think this is the real issue. Many boats never have a good
> inspection from one decade to the next, yet there is as far as I know
> no recorded case of a boat sinking from osmosis.
But there are cases of sinkings by bad repairs presumably?
>
>
TonyB
TonyB
"Anjo Sterringa" <anjo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:86adruk3f582ns4te...@4ax.com...
I didn't say it could only be done by professionals I said "experts" which
is not the same thing. Why are you drying out for a long time? How will you
know when it's dry?
TonyB
Jimbo
>I didn't say it could only be done by professionals I said "experts" which
>is not the same thing. Why are you drying out for a long time? How will you
>know when it's dry?
>TonyB
Give it a large thwack with 'ammer. If dust drops out, it's dry.
Jimbo
>I have third party insurance only as well- no survey needed of course.
>For an old boat it is mostly not cost effective to insure any more.
For the Jaguar 25 that i have just sold, i paid £150 a year for
insurance. The boat sold for £9k. I wouldn't describe that as not
cost-effective ?
Jimbo.
Ian Sandell
>>
>> I think this is the real issue. Many boats never have a good
>> inspection from one decade to the next, yet there is as far as I know
>> no recorded case of a boat sinking from osmosis.
>
>But there are cases of sinkings by bad repairs presumably?
>>
Are there any reported cases? I'm not saying that there arn't but I
have not heard of them. I suspect that if there were any such cases,
the osmosis industry would soon let us know about them.
Ian
TonyB
"Ian Sandell" <i...@sandell.co.uk> wrote in message
news:858eruch6nnhgjm4u...@4ax.com...
TonyB
Graham Frankland
>
> What *exactly* does the guarantee say?
>
We put a claim in on our last boat. The previous owner had it Gelshield
protected in France, in the days when skegs were not excluded.
A small patch of blistering appeared on the skeg a few months before the
guarantee expired so I got a quote from Dickies, which wasn't accepted by
insurers. They got International's "expert" Nigel Clegg down to inspect, we
agreed a repair regime and a reduced price of £700 for me to do the job
myself. The materials cost around £50 and, as the boat was already hauled
and dry, it was a nice little earner.
> > Many old hulls built prior to the introduction of isophthalic resins
>> suffer from osmosis but, it has yet to sink a boat.
>
> That's exactly what I said - small blisters are OK, but anything over 4"
is
> likely to compromise the hull strength. That means "may sink the boat"
>
I've watched many boats being treated in our local yard but never seen
osmosis blisters anywhere near the 4" you quote. The worst boat they say
they've had to treat was a Nelson, where quite large areas had to be
re-glassed but only in the outer laminations, not "through" the hull.
> If it has to be supervised that implies by an expert which is exactly what
I
> said. But I also said that badly repaired boats are not worth much - like
> badly repaired anything.
>
Osmosis treatment done badly is far less worrying than (say) badly swaged
rigging terminals, because you can see the problem. As long as the hull is
blasted or peeled properly and then dried thoroughly while frequently being
pressure washed/steam cleaned with fresh water to remove all the chemicals,
the treatment will be O.K. Filling and faring is hard work but applying the
epoxy is the easy bit. Its the prep that is critical and moisture levels
have to be monitored properly beforehand, that's why I say it's best to have
the drying supervised by someone who knows just what his meter is telling
him.
Graham.
Anjo Sterringa
in the area you are sailing/ getting insurance.
Not here in Spain it isn't!
PyroJames
I pay about 1.25% of value as a premium, and then get a no claims on top of
that. Cruising Area Bergen to La Rochelle, 365 days of the year, and covers
me short handed. If I extend that to cover all the med. it goes up to around
1.6%
--
PyroJames.
Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.
PyroJames
Graham Frankland <gdf...@nospam.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Y7Wdnb1YMop...@brightview.com...
>
news:ap48rc$9cq$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >Some repairs are OK but many
> > are not, and it just ain't worth the risk. 3M certainly don't guarantee
> > their product and I bet Blakes don't either if you look at the small
> print,
> > even if they do I wouldn't fancy trying to get any money off them in the
> > event of a claim, would you?
> >
>
> Blakes, West and Gelshield all have 5 year underwritten guarantees some of
> which, following an inspection, can be extended for further periods.
That seems pretty crap to me. It also seems to be less than you would expect
from a new fibreglass boat. Blisters in five years? Bleedin heck, I stick to
my 35 year old, and going fine thanks, timber boat.
--
PyroJames.
Some days there just isn't enough accelerant.
Ian Johnston
(Jimbo) wrote:
: My question is, for a £5k boat, what view will an insurer take on this?
I wouldn't bother having any more than third party insurance on a
cheap boat, and I doubt if insurers would care about blistering in
that case.
Ian
--
TonyB
"Ian Johnston" <ian.u...@talk21.com> wrote in message
news:cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-gdEIlmyP3ITc@localhost...
TonyB
>
TonyB
"> >Snip> >
> A small patch of blistering appeared on the skeg a few months before the
>
Exactly! It didn't work!
> I've watched many boats being treated in our local yard but never seen
> osmosis blisters anywhere near the 4" you quote. The worst boat they say
> they've had to treat was a Nelson, where quite large areas had to be
> re-glassed but only in the outer laminations, not "through" the hull.
Let me quote you a website:
http://pages.unisonfree.net/paul.absolon/linksframeset2.htm
some impressive blisters there!!
>
>
> Osmosis treatment done badly is far less worrying than (say) badly swaged
> rigging terminals, because you can see the problem. As long as the hull
is
> blasted or peeled properly and then dried thoroughly while frequently
being
> pressure washed/steam cleaned with fresh water to remove all the
chemicals,
> the treatment will be O.K. Filling and faring is hard work but applying
the
> epoxy is the easy bit. Its the prep that is critical and moisture levels
> have to be monitored properly beforehand, that's why I say it's best to
have
> the drying supervised by someone who knows just what his meter is telling
> him.
>
No arguement with that, trouble is when you buy a repaired boat, you don't
know if it's been done properly, so I'd only buy no-blisters or blisters but
not repaired blisters, if I can tell!
TonyB
>
>
>
>
Ian Johnston
:
: "Ian Johnston" <ian.u...@talk21.com> wrote in message
: news:cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-gdEIlmyP3ITc@localhost...
: > I wouldn't bother having any more than third party insurance on a
: > cheap boat, and I doubt if insurers would care about blistering in
: > that case.
-- To us cheapskate dinghy sailors, 5K is not cheap for a boat!
I don't insure the Mirror either!
Ian
John
the moisture content all over the hull and this can give you vital
information about how good/bad the lay up of the fibre glass really is. I
would get a survey on any boat I'm about to buy, not so much for insurance
purposes but for my own peace of mind.
J.H.news:cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-ftpmwkKf419y@localhost...