NAMBA Insurance

Discussion in 'General' started by rcengr, Oct 28, 2014.

  1. rcengr

    rcengr Vendor

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Posts:
    1,291
    Location:
    Ohio
    This is a heads up for those clubs that use NAMBA as their insurance. In the past, the insurance protected you anywhere you battled. So I always considered site insurance an additional level of coverage for the pond owner, but not really necessary. Now, you are only covered by NAMBA insurance if the site is insured.
    The way it was - from the 2014 NAMBA brochure:

    NAMBA membership provides you with primary coverage of $2,000,000 in liability and property damage coverage. It is individual insurance rather than site insurance, which protects you no matter where you are running.
    The new policy from the 2015 insurance page:
    To ensure coverage, NAMBA members may only participate in running boats at NAMBA insured sites. NAMBA liability/property damage insurance is in effect any time a member is running a boat at a NAMBA insured site,
    To get the site insurance, you need a NAMBA club with at least 5 paid NAMBA members and $50. It looks like there are 4 combat clubs registered with NAMBA for 2014, but I know of others that use NAMBA and are not registered as clubs.
    For the MNCC that I belong to, I don’t see any problems insuring our primary battle site. The problem is that we use as many as 3 alternate sites and I don’t know if we can afford to insure all them. We may have to restrict our battles or look for different insurance.
     
  2. GregMcFadden

    GregMcFadden Facilitator RCWC Staff

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2006
    Posts:
    2,512
    Has anyone currently with their insurance contacted them about the change?
     
  3. mike5334

    mike5334 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Posts:
    1,877
    Location:
    Mississippi
    I'd contact our NAMBA Representative, Rob Wood. Perhaps he can get more information and/or raise our concerns with the NAMBA leadership.
     
  4. NickMyers

    NickMyers Admin RCWC Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Posts:
    4,404
    Location:
    Federal Way, WA
    Upon seeing Mark's post this morning I contacted Rob and asked him to stop by and explain. This is an increased burden on small clubs and clubs that use a diverse number of sites, and represents a fundamental change, and not one for the better.
     
  5. Rob Wood

    Rob Wood NAMBA Rep

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Daly City, CA
    Thanks for the heads up, Nick. Here is the official (as of this morning, at any rate) story on NAMBA insurance - specifically as it relates to combat.
    As Mark stated, we've all been under the impression that our individual NAMBA memberships included individual insurance policies that covered us, anywhere we were engaged in model boating activities. There were always caveats, though, in that our coverage might be denied if we were in violation of any govermental restrictions, laws or ordinances, or NAMBA safety regulations.
    NAMBA Executive Secretary Al Waters recently learned through an audit by Travelers Insurance (the NAMBA insurance underwriter) that Travelers requires the individual model boater to be operating on a body of water for which NAMBA site insurance has been secured. This actually makes sense (to me, anyway) because by securing site insurance, that body of water becomes an officially insured environment, and a matter of record at both NAMBA and Travelers. It isn't clear when this requirement went into effect, or if it was technically always the case. Now we know what we need to do going forward.
    Site insurance protects the property owner against liability claims for personal injury or property damage for the calendar year, with the same $2,000,000 as is afforded the individual member. This is required for the individual members insurance to be in effect. Some cities and site owners require this additional coverage. Registered clubs may purchase this coverage by completing the NAMBA Site Insurance form with the applicable fee. However, please keep in mind that NAMBA site insurance provides insurance for, and names as an additional insured, the site owner only when the accident involves a NAMBA member.
    Only a club that is registered as a NAMBA club may apply for site insurance. This is an annual application, and requires filling out the form, and submitting it to the NAMBA Executive Secretary, along with a $10 fee. Site insurance for any particular body of water only needs to be secured once per year, and once secured, any NAMBA member in good standing who runs a boat there is covered by NAMBA insurance, as long as all safety regulations, govermental laws, ordinances, etc. are observed.
    Yes, it's true that clubs will need to pay $50 for site insurance for any pond or lake at which they want their individual members to be covered by NAMBA insurance, but at least you will know for certain that your members are covered. The alternative is to rely on your personal, homeowners or renters insurance policies to protect you. As all insurance companies have their own rules, YMMV, so talk to your insurance agents about this.
    The verbiage on the insurance page on the NAMBA website is currently undergoing editing, so be patient. All of the forms I mentioned in this post can be found on the Forms tab on the NAMBA website. I'll try to get all of your questions answered in a timely manner, but some things take more time than others to confirm.
    Rob Wood
    NAMBA Combat Chair
     
  6. Tugboat

    Tugboat Facilitator RCWC Staff Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Posts:
    8,298
    Location:
    Statesboro, GA
    So, if I am an IRCWCC member and I want my local pond covered for our battles, I fill out the form and send it in with the money? I have no problem spending $50 on our battle pond, just want to do it correctly.
     
  7. irnuke

    irnuke -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Posts:
    1,079
    Location:
    York, SC
    Yes... and it looks like IRC should look into following MWC in getting their own policy, since NAMBA's new, more stringent requirement is.... suboptimal for the way our hobby works. I could see a tightly knit group that uses the same 1-2 sites all the time to be able to this, especially if the ponds were on private property. But this absolutely kills the ability to go (for example) to a business that has a suitable pond and asking them for its use. A key selling point was that we were covered (by Namba) & any accident on that business' site would not go onto THEIR insurance.
    (Note, copying this reply to the other Namba thread)
     
  8. Tugboat

    Tugboat Facilitator RCWC Staff Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Posts:
    8,298
    Location:
    Statesboro, GA
    Doesn't MWCI's insurance require sites to be listed somewhere? Or am I remembering wrong? Not arguing over what's a good idea or anything, just clarifying because my memory of events 10 years past is crappy :)
     
  9. irnuke

    irnuke -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Posts:
    1,079
    Location:
    York, SC
    Yes, and how would this work for sites like Greenbriar... State parks? I can't see us paying to "insure" a State Park, and even if we tried, I can't see Namba being willing to do so. Imagine we're battling at one end of the lake & someone slips on the boat ramp at the other end and breaks a leg. If Namba has "insured the site", they'd (potentially) have to cover that injury.
     
  10. Rob Wood

    Rob Wood NAMBA Rep

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Daly City, CA
    I need to correct you on one statement you made: "A key selling point was that we were covered (by Namba) & any accident on that business' site would not go onto THEIR insurance."
    With all due respect, individual NAMBA insurance never protected the property owner; it protected the individual NAMBA member. That's what site insurance was and is for. There are a lot of misconceptions and assumptions floating around our combat community, and I think this is a good opportunity to clear them up.
    Even with site insurance in effect, the property owner is only protected against liability up to $2,000,000 aggregate, which is not very much in today's litigious society. Also important to mention here that the property owner is only covered if the incident involves an insured NAMBA member.
    As to whether some other insurance carrier might provide better coverage at a better rate for RC warship combat activities, I'd love to have the contact info of an agent who would provide details in black and white. Until then, my opinion is that NAMBA is the best deal around, even with these restrictions.
    Rob Wood
    NAMBA Combat Chair
     
  11. Tugboat

    Tugboat Facilitator RCWC Staff Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Posts:
    8,298
    Location:
    Statesboro, GA
    And unlike a hypothetical new insurance policy... the NAMBA insurance has had claims against it and held firm. A good track record is worth a LOT. I battle in Statesboro 95% of the time and I'm willing to pony up the $50. With a Nats at Oakboro, the $50 can be spread among all attendees as part of the Nats fee.

    And we are not generally insuring the park. We are insuring the park owner against claims related to the battle. If someone's kid gets hit in the eye by a BB from our ships, then that's on the insurance. If that German lady that harangued us in 2012 trips over a tree root, that's NOT on our insurance.
     
  12. Rob Wood

    Rob Wood NAMBA Rep

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Daly City, CA
    Jeff,
    Not wishing to seem confrontational, but all of us need to carefully research what NAMBA insurance covers and what it doesn't, and be careful that what we say is as accurate as possible. NAMBA insurance coverage - even site insurance - has limitations, and always has. Site insurance only applies when a NAMBA member is involved in an indident in which personal injury or property damage occurs. Your example would not be covered, now or in the past.
    All site insurance does is protect the site owner for up to $2,000,000 aggregate liability coverage when a NAMBA member is involved. Not only that, unless extraordinary measures are taken to protect spectators or non-NAMBA members on a lake or pond, no one is allowed to be in the water during combat, whether swimming or in a watercraft. Extraordinary measures include such things as physically preventing boats or swimmers from coming within range of armed ships. Lake Minden in California is a good example of this, as we run a net all the way across the lake.
    Rob Wood
    NAMBA Combat Chair
     
  13. GregMcFadden

    GregMcFadden Facilitator RCWC Staff

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2006
    Posts:
    2,512
    My bigger concern is that namba seems to state that you can't get site insurance if you have less than 5 members. if that is the case those of us with small groups are really screwed.
     
  14. Rob Wood

    Rob Wood NAMBA Rep

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Daly City, CA
    This is a technicality. Al Waters says NAMBA leadership is talking about reducing this to 2 for 2015. Even if it remains at 5, you can grant membership to any NAMBA member for the purposes of applying for site insurance. There is no prohibition against a NAMBA member belonging to more than one club.
    Rob Wood
    NAMBA Combat Chair
     
  15. Tugboat

    Tugboat Facilitator RCWC Staff Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Posts:
    8,298
    Location:
    Statesboro, GA
    There is a specific exemption in the 'no men in the water while boats are on the water' part of safety that specfically allows NAMBA members to retrieve boats, requiring that all ships remain stationary and/or clear the area where the man is in the water. Section 8.A.11.

    I'd encourage everyone concerned to review Section 9, which is very short and pretty concise, which covers our insurance.
     
  16. irnuke

    irnuke -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Posts:
    1,079
    Location:
    York, SC
    No worries, Rob.
    Like you said, alot of misconceptions out there.. including my own. It's good to get "official" clarification for some areas that were either murky of flat-out misunderstood, especially when the policies are being modified.
     
  17. jadfer

    jadfer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Posts:
    1,576
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Club of 5 or more members... IRC is a club.. it has more than 5 members.

    MWC or IRC/NAMBA - I would never expect anyone to allow a battle with bb's flying around without a site insurance certificate. The City of Rosenberg required a site certificate in order to hold the event and I would have thought ANY municipality would require it for their site. YOU should get one if you are hosting on your property.

    We had MWC and NAMBA in effect for the event this past weekend and the cost is the same to all, the difference is who pays the tab. So far the MWC has been paying the site costs of about $50, IRC the host takes care of the cost that I am aware of. It can be recovered in battle fees or donations.

    Every site I have hosted at has had a site certificate issued by MWC - City of Rosenberg, City of Deer Park, and I think H and H.

    This is nothing to worry about really. If you use many sites then you just need more certificates.
     
  18. rcengr

    rcengr Vendor

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Posts:
    1,291
    Location:
    Ohio
    I think the IRC will be the least impacted by this. They have plenty of members, so they just need to make sure that the battle directors have sent in the money and paperwork for each local pond.
    The smaller clubs like I'm in will have a bigger problem. First I need to get the procrastinators to renew their NAMBA before June.o_O
    Still, I don't see us insuring more than two sites. So moving the battles around to spread out the traveling between the captains will no longer be possible. That will reduce the new members that we can recruit and will reduce the number of captains we have at each battle.
     
  19. Rob Wood

    Rob Wood NAMBA Rep

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Daly City, CA
    The important thing to keep in mind is that NAMBA is not an insurance agency. It's an association of all of its members, and those numbers (currently around 1,600) give the association some buying power with insurance providers such as Travelers. The most difficult issues for NAMBA in procuring the best coverage for all of us is that insurance underwriters don't really understand the dynamics involved in competitive model boating, and they especially get alarmed when they hear words like "projectile' and "gun" coming from NAMBA leadership during audits and rate and coverage negotiations. This is especially ironic when you consider the actual (versus imagined) risks involved in high speed racing compared to warship combat.
    Rob
     
  20. Tugboat

    Tugboat Facilitator RCWC Staff Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Posts:
    8,298
    Location:
    Statesboro, GA
    Johnny, those were the words-words I was looking for. 'Site Certificate'. Brian K had to get one for each of the 2 ponds we normally battle at (altho one got so shallow that it wasn't feasible).