3 ms·

You bear the risk that you’ll have to pay your pro-rata share of any cargo sacrificed to save the ship. You can (and probably should) have your own insurance t

by Digory 5y ago

You bear the risk that you’ll have to pay your pro-rata share of any cargo sacrificed to save the ship. You can (and probably should) have your own insurance that will pay you in case this happens. The insurer can pay cash to the cargo owners ASAP, and then sort out the equitable sale of the actual cargo and distribution of the proceeds. Kind of like a bankruptcy for a ship’s voyage. If they have to wreck some stuff to save everybody else, and that works, everybody else has to pay something. Fair-ish, but I suspect Insurers start to call foul on Evergreen’s repeated groundings.

hef19898 5y ago
It is surprising how even "professionals" (read: companies shipping loads of containers every month) don't get that insurance part. And that insurance is dirt cheap, I used to have one as a basis for my now closed company. It covered all losses, globally, for all modes of transportation for solar modules (and some other electronics falling into the same class of products), covered warehousing. For a projected transported value of appr. 100k € per months I paid roughly 1k per year. And still people for go that, relying on the suppliers "insurance" based on Incoterms... Well, those insurance is usually very limited and leaves some holes, especially if people don't get what incoterms to use and what they mean...
- dmurray 5y ago
  If you're shipping "loads of containers every month" but you don't send them all on the same ship, perhaps you can afford to self-insure. Insurance is so cheap because only a tiny fraction of freight is lost.
  - hef19898 5y ago
    It took one un-loading incident in Rotterdam to cause damage north of what 10 years worth of insurance premiums would have cost, in the case I mentioned above. And that's excluding the added benefits of your insurance handling all the administrative stuff, from on-site haverie commissars (transportation acident investigators) to sorting out claims against any third parties. Or claims from any third parties.

by Digory 5y ago

hef19898 5y ago

It is surprising how even "professionals" (read: companies shipping loads of containers every month) don't get that insurance part. And that insurance is dirt cheap, I used to have one as a basis for my now closed company. It covered all losses, globally, for all modes of transportation for solar modules (and some other electronics falling into the same class of products), covered warehousing. For a projected transported value of appr. 100k € per months I paid roughly 1k per year. And still people for go that, relying on the suppliers "insurance" based on Incoterms... Well, those insurance is usually very limited and leaves some holes, especially if people don't get what incoterms to use and what they mean...

dmurray 5y ago
If you're shipping "loads of containers every month" but you don't send them all on the same ship, perhaps you can afford to self-insure. Insurance is so cheap because only a tiny fraction of freight is lost.
- hef19898 5y ago
  It took one un-loading incident in Rotterdam to cause damage north of what 10 years worth of insurance premiums would have cost, in the case I mentioned above. And that's excluding the added benefits of your insurance handling all the administrative stuff, from on-site haverie commissars (transportation acident investigators) to sorting out claims against any third parties. Or claims from any third parties.