Boat damaged on the hard, who pays?

[scrumper]

There was a vicious nor'easter in my area last night. I went down to the marina today and a couple of boats had been blown off their blocks - a very new and expensive 50' sailboat had obviously been blown sideways off its blocks into a mid '00s Tiara, causing extensive damage to the powerboat. That got me wondering who pays out in that situation? I was thinking about acts of god, the marina contract, the boat owner's insurance, and in this case the insurance of the boat that had clearly blown over into the Tiara.

How does this sort of thing usually play out? Very sad for the owners of both boats - and the guys in the marina too who are doubtless fielding calls from a pair of very angry and upset owners.

 

[keokie]

Well, years ago a huge tree in my neighborhood blew over and pancaked part of their neighbor's house. The two families struggled over it, but the insurance companies both agreed the damage was to be paid by the insurance of the homeowner, not the tree owner.

 

[ttmott]

The contract at my marina is no fault. Even if their employees pull some bonehead stunt the marina is still no fault. Force magure and acts of god the same. Now, with that said, My boat was on the hard getting needed maintenance. The marina put a large boat next to mine and the owner proceeded to sand the bottom paint off without a vacuum to keep the dust down. The contractor I had working on my boat took up the issue with the marina's management - nothing was done. That bottom paint leached into the gelcoat all over my boat, even on the bridge roof. It was north of $4K to get it all cleaned up. Since we notified the marina's management and they did nothing to correct the issue they stood up the $4K.
So, I think everything is different on how it can play out.

 

[Golfman25]

Boater’s insurance should pay. It would be unaffordable for anyone if marina has to insure everyones boat.

 

[Sua Sponte]

Boater’s insurance should pay. It would be unaffordable for anyone if marina has to insure everyones boat.

This. There is a process called subrogation that allows the insurance companies to recover from one another in the event of third-party culpability.

For credibility, I run a property & casualty insurance company and see this all the time.

 

[scrumper]

Thanks for the insights - interesting and I think answers it.

 

[GypsmJim]

Well, years ago a huge tree in my neighborhood blew over and pancaked part of their neighbor's house. The two families struggled over it, but the insurance companies both agreed the damage was to be paid by the insurance of the homeowner, not the tree owner.

This just came up. If the tree was healthy and an act of god blew it down, the tree owner is not responsible. However......., many insurance policies exclude act of god.

OTOH, if the tree was in bad shape and was not maintained by the owner (it should have been cut down), the owner is responsible.

 

[MrHappy]

This just came up. If the tree was healthy and an act of god blew it down, the tree owner is not responsible. However......., many insurance policies exclude act of god.

OTOH, if the tree was in bad shape and was not maintained by the owner (it should have been cut down), the owner is responsible.

This is correct in Indiana. May be different in other states.

 

[keokie]

This just came up. If the tree was healthy and an act of god blew it down, the tree owner is not responsible. However......., many insurance policies exclude act of god.

OTOH, if the tree was in bad shape and was not maintained by the owner (it should have been cut down), the owner is responsible.

The tree in question was an un-maintained Eucalyptus. It blew down in a very violent storm.

 

[GypsmJim]

The tree in question was an un-maintained Eucalyptus. It blew down in a very violent storm.

The key word is un-maintained. If the owner was negligent, his insurance can be made liable. If not, the "violent storm" made neither person responsible.

 

[bobeast]

I think the lawyers of all affected parties get together and figure out how best to screw the boat owners.

 

[keokie]

The key word is un-maintained. If the owner was negligent, his insurance can be made liable. If not, the "violent storm" made neither person responsible.

Yes, I used that word purposefully. Negligent would be arguable. Nothing out of the norm as far as the appearance of the tree. Eucalyptus tend to 'self prune'. But I had never seen the owner do anything to the tree in my many years in the neighborhood. In a thousand of the same cases, I'm sure there could be other results. Im just relaying what happened here. The neighbors were not particularly friendly, but as I understand it, neither had a lawyer involved.