Single Parent Hiring Boats

[BB37]

2 hours ago, SimonD said:

Is there any way to deal with Bridgecraft direct? All I can see is the Hoseasons site which requires two adults (18+).

We rung them up and booked direct.

 

[rightsaidfred]

2 hours ago, grendel said:

next thing you know, single parents wont be able to take the kids in the car, without another responsible adult to keep an eye on the kids. health and safety gone mad IMHO.

Maybe or maybe its partially the lets sue them and get a free holiday culture we have now that is to blame, all forms of insurance are getting more and more stringent.

Fred

[smellyloo]

3 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

Maybe or maybe its partially the lets sue them and get a free holiday culture we have now that is to blame, all forms of insurance are getting more and more stringent.

Fred

Quite so ................

People who think fruadulant insurance claims isn't stealing need to be ...................

There are many many things I would like to do to them but i'll keep my powder dry.

This also applies to the litigation companies who kindly ring me to enquire about my recent accident?

[Katie]

2 hours ago, marshman said:

I am sure that Clive will be along soon to tell us he is changing his insurer - either that or explaining why a hirecraft poses more risk to a single parent than either Center Parcs or a seaside holiday??

Either that or produce the statistics proving it is more hazardous - which he will not be able to do!!!

 

I would think that was blatantly obvious... as a hirecraft is a moving object on water, subject to winds and tides and I don’t believe either Centre Parks or a static seaside holiday are. It would also depend on the age and amount of children with the hirer, but all insurers have a cut off point. 

[marshman]

Not at all blatantly obvious, Katie - I have been around boats on the Broads for years, and as a single parent, and I am aware that if they wear life jackets outside the boat, there is minimal risk. There may be a perception that is higher risk but there is no evidence to suggest that is the case and I think many familiar with the Broads would agree with me.

There is a lot of water at Center Parks and they also use pedalos without supervision and life jackets - equally there are several beaches in Norfolk where lifeguards are employed throughout the summer. Someone must perceive a risk even if you do not...!!!

[Katie]

5 minutes ago, marshman said:

Not at all blatantly obvious, Katie - I have been around boats on the Broads for years, and as a single parent, and I am aware that if they wear life jackets outside the boat, there is minimal risk. There may be a perception that is higher risk but there is no evidence to suggest that is the case and I think many familiar with the Broads would agree with me.

There is a lot of water at Center Parks and they also use pedalos without supervision and life jackets - equally there are several beaches in Norfolk where lifeguards are employed throughout the summer. Someone must perceive a risk even if you do not...!!!

There are risks in whatever you chose to do or where you go ! My comment was more from an insurers point of view and that any business involved has to adhere to it. Insurers usually only cover the hired property ( which would include a boat) what the people chose to do outside of that would not necessarily be covered. Very few people would have your depth of experience on the Broads or children that have been brought up in that environment. Not all parents are responsible, single or otherwise and I’ve witnessed many occasions when children are allowed to run, jump and climb on the boat without any evidence of a life jacket and like most insurers, they would look at averages and not exceptions. 

[rightsaidfred]

The difference in perceived risk between people that practise an activity and those that asses it is often quite wide and generally the true picture is somewhere in the middle, also there is often a considerable difference in the abilities and understanding of the dangers between different people undertaking the same activity.

On a slightly different tact all business write their T & Cs in accordance with their own requirements and as a customer we either accept them on or go elsewhere, in this case as most of the major yards operate the same T & Cs there must be a good reason for it,  there really is no reason why Clive or any other business operator should have to explain their practise even if it does make life difficult for some, there are of have been several company`s I have or could have dealt with where their terms have been restrictive to the point I couldn`t have what I wanted or I chose to go elsewhere.

Fred

[Vaughan]

I think this debate is getting into a difference between the boat's insurance and the hirer's personal insurance.

The boat is insured by the boatyard and when you pay the damage waiver, you are waiving your liability to pay the excess on that insurance if you do any damage.

Some have suggested that yards don't often claim on their insurance and this is correct. Hire boats (believe it or not) don't very often get seriously damaged. A broken window is more expensive to repair than a hole in the hull, if you discount the labour charge, since you are employing the labour anyway. The insurance will always pay out on third party claims, of course.

If, when mooring up, you trip over on the quay and break your ankle, this has nothing to do with the boat's insurance. You are always recommended by boatyards to have your own injury and loss insurance and you will probably find that your own household insurance will include this risk, when you are on holiday. You are usually also covered if you have paid for the holiday by credit card - but not debit card.

Next point is that in maritime law, when you hire a boat, you are the "charterer" and become fully responsible for the boat during your charter. There is nothing to say how you crew it, or handle it. That is up to you.

Waterways with locks will usually have a Local Authority rule that a boat must have two crew, in order to handle the lines in the locks, but I have not heard of this rule being imposed on the Broads.

So personally, I don't think this so called ban on single hirers is driven by insurance.

I also respectfully suggest that we don't know much about the OP's actual circumstances. Maybe something was misunderstood in this case?

In my experience I have often hired a boat to a single hirer, but only if I know them as a regular customer. I don't think I would hire a boat to a single first-timer but then that would not be because of insurance - just common sense.

That said, you will not be insured if you break the conditions of hire, for instance by navigating at night or by towing.

 

[Cockatoo]

I've seen another case on Facebook where an already booked and confirmed hire was cancelled because there was only one adult

 

[ExSurveyor]

How many times have we seen two adults at the front on their phones and two children at the back,  unsupervised and without life jackets.

Just a thought.

[Davydine]

Sad news. As an older child (about 14, 15) I have very happy memories of a holiday with just my dad and one of my friends. Mum was working so was perfectly happy for us to go on a boys holiday.

Not a single parent myself, but had thought I might take my two for a long weekend. There must be an age at which children are old enough to be responsible crew members, I can perhaps understand it being a problem with young children, but surely older children would be ok?

[rightsaidfred]

When is a child not a child legally its 18 logically who knows if and when some children ever grow up, looking at some adults never.

Fred

[NorfolkNog]

3 hours ago, Vaughan said:

So personally, I don't think this so called ban on single hirers is driven by insurance.

I've been wondering that for a while. I think there is more to it. Perhaps we will never know!

[Wussername]

1 hour ago, Davydine said:

Sad news. As an older child (about 14, 15) I have very happy memories of a holiday with just my dad and one of my friends. Mum was working so was perfectly happy for us to go on a boys holiday.

Not a single parent myself, but had thought I might take my two for a long weekend. There must be an age at which children are old enough to be responsible crew members, I can perhaps understand it being a problem with young children, but surely older children would be ok?

I agree. With a responsible adult a 14 or 15 year old would in my opinion be OK. However on some occasions I have refused to "sign off" some adult parties, some single crews, but not all, and indeed some couples where I felt that the circumstances were such that sadly it would not be appropriate to allow their holiday to take place.

With an able and experienced single parent with one or two behaved and disciplined children I would not have an issue. If I was in any doubt I used to refer by misgivings to the owner of the boat yard.

I cannot ever remember my authority being questioned.

[unclemike]

1 hour ago, rightsaidfred said:

When is a child not a child legally its 18 logically who knows if and when some children ever grow up, looking at some adults never.

growing old is compulsory,growing up isn't,so i  didn't

[VetChugger]

6 hours ago, Vaughan said:

Waterways with locks will usually have a Local Authority rule that a boat must have two crew, in order to handle the lines in the locks, but I have not heard of this rule being imposed on the Broads.

Never heard of this Vaughan, I've had some years on the canals, many times single handed and I encounter a lot of single crewed boats including 50' narrow boats. I often simply take my time and "walk" the boat through using the ropes.

[Vaughan]

10 hours ago, VetChugger said:

Never heard of this Vaughan, I've had some years on the canals,

Sorry, I don't know about the English canals, I have never been on them. Maybe it's time I did!  - I did say "most" waterways though.

I am pretty certain that is the rule on the Thames and it certainly is on all waterways in France. Doing a lock on the Canal du Midi on your own is a bit dodgy and working up the locks solo is almost impossible, unless the lock keeper is feeling friendly. Thames lock keepers are great people and very helpful in taking a line for you. French lock keepers are . . . . French.

[ranworthbreeze]

We encountered single handed crew on the Marple locks a few years ago whilst doing the Cheshire Ring, we ended up using one of our crew to help him and speed up the operation, there are 16 locks in this flight with very short pounds between them.

Writer & boater John Gag used to do his trips single handed and always carried a set of steps o get off of the roof of his narrow boat, this was before Elf & Safety where all locks had to have ladders fitted.

Regards

Alan

[Cockatoo]

From the other forum

 

"Had a phone call from Richardson's Friday to inform me I WON'T be allowed to hire from this year on, due to insurance not covering single parents with children under the age of 18!!"

 

So it seems that insurance is the issue.

[Broads01]

17 minutes ago, SteveDuk said:

From the other forum

 

"Had a phone call from Richardson's Friday to inform me I WON'T be allowed to hire from this year on, due to insurance not covering single parents with children under the age of 18!!"

 

So it seems that insurance is the issue.

Thanks for sharing, Steve. I'm still finding this policy unfathomable to be honest. I'm hiring solo (without children)  from Richardsons this year and whilst they did query the booking at the time and checked I had experience they accepted it fine as they always have. Presumably however if I phoned them now and asked to amend the booking and said my 7 year old nephew was coming with me they'd say no. So how does being accompanied by one (well behaved) child make me more of a risk? 

[Cockatoo]

5 minutes ago, Broads01 said:

Thanks for sharing, Steve. I'm still finding this policy unfathomable to be honest. I'm hiring solo (without children)  from Richardsons this year and whilst they did query the booking at the time and checked I had experience they accepted it fine as they always have. Presumably however if I phoned them now and asked to amend the booking and said my 7 year old nephew was coming with me they'd say no. So how does being accompanied by one (well behaved) child make me more of a risk? 

Exactly, my son, at 7, was a lot more use as crew than sundry ex-girlfriends I took on the Broads at various times.

 

Disclaimer: Long before I met Debs of course 

[LondonRascal]

So, its seems this is a new policy decision (based upon insurance) at Richardson's now effecting solo hirers too.

I've read over on one of the Facebook Groups that a regular solo hirer has been called to say that his holiday is cancelled due to the fact he was a solo hirer and he has accepted a refund.

This is a great shame as I had planed a couple of trips with Richardson's myself as their classic fleet are cheap and cheerful and ideal for a quick break - while Barnes Brinkcraft accept solo hirers still, they don't have the same range of budget boats. 

I can only assume that something may have happened at some point that has caused Richarson's to take this move perhaps based upon a risk assessment or to ensure premiums are kept reasonable for their insurance (or just because there was once a claim) who can say, but sure is a real shame. 

[oldgregg]

That doesn't strike me as a good PR move. Most of the Broads vloggers would be impacted by that change, and it would be not the best idea to turn away that demographic - People really do book the boats they see in the videos.

[marshman]

Its all Vaughans fault really, because it has set me thinking!! Is this ban to do with the boat insurance or the personal insurance?

If it is the boat, then its a bit bizarre since none of the yards, or rarely, claim for damage to the boat - they just get on and repair it! And if it is to do with the boat, what relevance is the fact that it is a single parent - and is this single, i.e. divorced or a married partner holidaying alone? What happens to a couple with children, where one partner is disabled - does this mean that with only one able bodied person, the insurance is not valid? Is that discriminatory?  Surely accidents to a boat are caused by lack of care, rather than being taken by a single parent or a single hirer like Rascal?And are they restrictions imposed by a blanket  "catch all" within the Wyndhams Vacations conditions, or Richardsons themselves?? ( CLIVE ? )

It must be to do with the boat and not your Personal Insurance, seeing as though you can opt out of that and take your own Insurance under a general Travel Ins,  - you are not forced to take Wyndhams own Travel Insurance. Take out separate cover and show it to the yard.

I am reminded of all those individuals, when hiring a car abroad, being "forced" to take out excess insurance, when all you need to do is to take out an excess policy here in the UK and pay only a modest premium, rather than the inflated cost from a commission based salesman on a car hire desk in some foreign airport!

Still total lack of clarity  - mainly muddy water I think, but I am now more confused

[marshman]

Ooops - Wyndhams no more? Platinum Equity now!!