Talk:Marine insurance

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Maritime task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Finance & Investment Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Memo to self

Add sections on IV and cargo insurance. Also Schedule 1 (defintions) and schedule 2 (standard policy) of MIA --Major Bonkers 20:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Marine Insurance Act is a UK thing, right? The article doesn't make that clear. At any rate, the article probably shouldn't focus so much on one country's legal structure; Marine Insurance Act might be the place for the details.. If I knew more about this I'd do it, but I don't, so I won't... CDC (talk) 20:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Marine Insurance Act is a UK statute. It is, however, a consolidation of previous judgments, precedents, and practice. Because of the influence of English law in this area I think that it is appropriate to quote quite so extensively; but the basic principles will almost certainly be applicable in other jurisdictions. Incidentally, an unidentified user has added '1906' after each mention of the Act which is, perhaps, otiose. I'll leave it for a bit to see if anyone posts a justification, but if none is forthcoming I'll revert the article back. --Major Bonkers 08:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marine Insurance Act

The wide adoption by nations involved in maritime commerce of the custom, practice and case law of marine insurance codified in the M.I.A. of 1906, demonstrates that it became far more than 'a UK thing'. As to the inclusion of '1906', it is properly correct to differentiate from the Marine Insurance Act of 1909. Anthony Florence 01:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Fair enough, but why have you altered this sentence in the first paragraph so that it reads: 'In 1906 the Marine Insurance Act 1906 was passed which codified the previous common law [... .]'. Given that the only MIA mentioned in the article (and most textbooks) is the 1906 version, why is it necessary to distinguish the MIA 1906 from an unmentioned and minor subsequent Act? I still think that the date needs to be mentioned only once in the body of the text; the current version of the text is unwieldly and treats the readers as idiots. --Major Bonkers 06:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of two portions of section 39 concerning seaworthiness. Not linked to seakeeping as this is markedly different from the definition of insurance law purposes. --BlueSeasAdj 09:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BluesSeasAdjuster (talk • contribs) [reply]

Average adjuster

I added mention of this phrase, which I encountered while editing at DMOZ. It's basically the description I wrote for the Average Adjusters category. It might need some touch up by Major Bonkers or another one of the editors who have made one of the best insurance articles at Wiki. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dozen (talk • contribs) 06:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Many thanks for your kind remarks on the quality of the article. --Major Bonkers 06:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This section needs a bit of further attention, by someone versed in the subject. General Average is not only payable by cargo interests, but also by the ship. Moreover, no cargo interests contribute to particular average. Particular average is an expence paid for by the owner of the ship. For example, a ship runs aground, the rudder is damaged. That is a particular average cost paid for by the owner. The ship is towed to safety. That is a general average cost paid for by all the parties in the common maritime adventure, (ship, cargo, even the owners of the fuel onboard if they are a party other than the owners). Being my first day on the site, I'm not yet up to the point of doing edits myself. Other than this, the article as a whole is a very good read.

Creekman (talk) 19:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Being a practising Average Adjuster I am more than happy to edit the appropriate points, Average as a whole included. There are some areas that do need some clarification that I will beef up in a short period. --Wizarofnoz 19:53, 8 July 2008 (GMT)

'Particular Average' is levied on a group of cargo owners and not all of the cargo owners - I have no idea what this is supposed to mean (no offence) but it doesn't bear any relation to Particular Average as is widely known, see Brown, Goodacre or Arnould. Particular Average is infact a loss that is not total or general and applies to both cargo and hull insurance. Basic edit correcting those parties that contribute under General Average. Wizarofnoz 17:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stub article !?!

I don't know how to tell when this article was declared a stub article by the "Missing Encyclopedic Articles project". It's about time this designation was removed, right? 2*6 06:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: I came across the heading and stub, effectively wrote all of the article, and left the stub at the bottom. I'll remove it. --Major Bonkers 06:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent revisions

[Sigh.] Right; to begin with, someone (User:KaiserbBot) has removed the specific link 'Protection and Indemnity' which should take you here P&I insurance. I'll leave a message asking him not to interfere.

Secondly, User 221.134.103.125 has added some information in the header so that the first sentence reads: Marine insurance covers the loss or damage of ships, goods or property at sea and goods and property at road and in air also. Mainly it covers the transit risk. This is not correct. Historically marine insurance has been considered a seperate and distinct category of insurance; nowadays it is often lumped together as MAT, meaning 'Marine, Aviation, [and] Transit [insurance]'. My own feelings are that this User's revision is ambiguous and should be removed; if he wants to set up a stub, redirection site, or new site on MAT, good luck to him, but it's wrong to display such information quite so prominently in this article. So: I feel that it's a point worth making - just not quite so prominently - and will move it to the main body of the text.--Major Bonkers 06:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Memo to long-suffering self: also clean up the 'Average' section. --Major Bonkers 06:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Things to do

Create section in respect of special terminology: abandonment, salvage, etc.--Major Bonkers 12:44, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grand job

congratulations to all of you. extraordnary job. Admiral Casey

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.79.194 (talk) 05:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hashes

In the section Average two characters # appear. What are they doing there? 86.132.222.9 (talk) 15:44, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marine insurance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715030319/http://press.oxforddnb.com/index/16/101016829/ to http://press.oxforddnb.com/index/16/101016829

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:33, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]