Cost of insurance survey

My insurer (Markel) is requiring a survey before the next renewal and the one quote I have gotten so far is $18/foot. What are reasonable rates for a survey and more siginificantly do surveyors charge a lesser rate for insurance surveys that for condition surveys requested by propsective purchasers?

To answer my own question, yes there is a difference:

http://www.premierins.com/premierIns/Marine_MarineSurveys.asp


Time to shop around some more.

Surveys

Geoff,

Ask around and demand sample surveys before hiring one on. I've seen absolute crap from some 'Accredited marine surveyors' whether NAMS or SAMS and here, in San Francisco, the ratio of crap to good is in the ratio of like 25:5 (25 crappy surveyors to 5 good ones). This concurs with several local marine insurance companies/brokers I speak with who see thousands of local surveys a year. I'm aiming to be the top of the 5 good ones here in San Fran.

Also, keep in mind anyone can be a marine surveyor and hang a shingle since it requires no license or regulatory oversight. It's a dodgy market, so be careful, and as I mentioned, NAMS and SAMS (two marine surveyor associations/societies) are no guarantee of quality. Pay your dues and your in.

http://www.marinesurvey.org/

http://www.nams-cms.org/

Being a surveyor, I make little distinction between an "Insurance" survey and a "Pre-purchase" survey. I believe that you, as a customer, should know all about your boat, be safe, know the condition of your vessel and not just get an inventory list of equipment on your boat, which is what most 'insurance' surveys entail. Demand the best from your surveyor, ask questions, and don't take any crap from them. YOU are paying them, not vice versa.......

Also, I ask people who solely shop for lowest price if that's the first thing they'd ask a brain surgeon "What's your price?" Or if they try and find the cheapest mechanic. Suddenly their tune changes as you'll usually get what you pay for. I've seen some absolutely crappy surveys from SAMS and NAMS accredited surveyors that were borderline fraudulent AND/or were rejected by insurance companies where I had to come in and clean up THEIR sloppy work.

Anyway, call a few yards, marine insurance agents, harbor masters and see whose name pops up on most, if not all, of the lists......that's a good sign.


Good luck
John M.

I could have used a much better surveyor when I bought the boat, but now, since this is purely to keep the insurance company happy, I'm in a "I'm not going to pay a lot for that muffler" frame of mind. It seems Markel's primary interest is in whether the boat is going to sink at its mooring, i.e. the condition of the bottom. Maybe it's hubris, but after spending nine years going over every inch of the boat and spending (don't tell my wife) more than the original purchase price on refitting it, I would be surprised if a C&V survey is going to tell me anything I don't already know.

C & V Survey

Geoff,

I don't doubt your abilities nor the knowledge of your boat as more than likey it is better than 94% of the typical surveyors out there.

However, for instance, last week I just did what was to be a "C&V survey" on a neighbor's boat (41' trawler) who I consider as conscientious as myself, always upgrading systems and tending to his boat appropriately. I explained I do complete surveys at a fair price and told him that he'd receive more than a two page inventory of the vessel's equipment and get a legitimate inspection. In that way he knows that his vessel is safe, has an idea of what to focus on in the near and long term, and if boarded by USCG or other marine enforcement agency, he'll be up to standards. What did I find?

1: A bronze thru-hull with crevice corrosion and a major pit which was creating a situation of being ready to crack off at the inner hull (was not readily visible due to all the paint on it and being on the bottom side of thru-hull). This was before the sea cock...so it would not of been of much use had the thru-hull cracked off and opened a 1.5” hole to the sea.....not good.

2. Too small of a ship's bell (8" or 200 mm are required on vessels over 39.4 feet to 65.6 feet - his was 6"). Result? Possible USCG fine if boarded and no 8" bell is onboard - could cover the cost of the survey alone right there.

3. Fuel vent lines were not USCG approved hose and looping downwards trapping fuel – possible fuel spill if the vent’s gurgled when topping off (which explains why he told me he'd always spill a little fuel when filling his tanks) Again, USCG/State fine could cover the cost of the survey and then some right there.

4. No flame screens on fuel tank vents on hull

5. An area of delam *just* beginning on the foredeck that was readily repairable now. It was due to a slightly loose stanchion bolt, but if left for another year or so, major surgery may have been required to repair core rot.

6. In a very inaccessible area where his steering cables were chafing on a copper water pipe (already nearly 1/16" groove in pipe).

7. Disconnected bond wire to rudder post explaining why his bronze rudder was eating up zincs (all bronze bits were bonded on his GRP vessel)

8. Wrong info on the USCG documentation papers!!!!!

Etc, Etc.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not at all doubting your desire to appease the insurance company and knowledge of your boat, but I like to go all out. I really don't do what I consider a “C&V survey” as I charge a reasonable rate for a full survey. Why? Perfect example: if that thru-hull did crack off and the boat sank, whose name would be on the survey’s stamp of approval as a "reasonable risk" vessel? Mine! I see lawyers and lawsuits galore and his insurance company all over my back like an 800 lb gorilla. That's just my philosophy and how I conduct business. Surveyors ARE liable for omissions, failure to identify hazardous conditions/situations, and in general, poor/sloppy inspections.....I see it on occasion - surveyors being sued due to sub-standard surveys. Working with the USCG has provided me with invaluable information which a typical surveyor just doesn't posses, not to mention, I don't like litigation.

I want to walk away from a boat and feel that I did the best I could possibly do and the client got the best information they could obtain, considering the circumstances. The result? A safe boat, a happy boater and a repeat customer.

Again, my philosophy and my business model. 98% of most surveyors would probably disagree with me on this one, but I’ve seen some of them end up in court over sloppy inspections, failure to check basic safety gear that failed and injured/killed some one, and what not.

Reputation is my name of the game, not cranking out inventory lists and wondering when I'll get a call from a lawyer due to an injury/death and/or vessel fire/sinking.

In the end, he paid an extra 100 odd bucks for a thorough 45 page report on the state of his vessel....not a bad investment in my way of thinking.

Plus, he passed and received a USCG Vessel Safety Check sticker which he can report to his insurance company that *may* possibly reduce his rate a bit.......and that was a freebie!

Other's may disagree with my approach, and that's ok, but I've had no complaints as of yet.

John M.

Wanna do my survey?