DAN Dive insurance

[josh]

Had DAN for a good few years now. Never needed as much as a phone call. But I still think its money well spent.

 

[DandyDon]

Im considering picking up some DAN coverage for a out of country dive trip and I was just wondering if anyone had any experience with DAN during a trip...Or if they think coverage is necessary. To me it appears well worth it just in case you had to ride the chamber a bit or something else unforseen came along

:shocked2: OMG?! You're diving without DAN Dive Ins? You need it for the first dive too.

I've seen 6 divers leave by ambulances over the years, two flown back to the US for treatment. Without DAN, those two would be dead.

I have the DAN Master plan for me and my entire family. I hope I never need it, but then again, I have used my medical insurance on a few occasions, not exactly by plan.

Good diving, Craig

Yeah, the middle plan at least. The bottom plan is so bare, and only $10 a year cheaper. Since I do Trip Insurance for international trips too, I might cut back to the middle? Plans comparisons: http://www.diversalertnetwork.org/insurance/compare.asp

Their Gear and Trip insurance plans suck, but their Dive Ins is essential...!

 

[openmindOW]

DAN Insurance is super.

DAN is a not-for-profit. DAN performs highly valuable services (research, medical advice, medical asistance) for divers. And the service is great. I have called DAN several times over the years. Real people actually answer the phones.

If you are diving, you should be a DAN member. Just my opinion.

 

[BonaireDan]

Yes - local diving or around the world. Don't dive without DAN Insurance. $57 USD can save you tens of thousands of dollars as well as yo rlife. DAN will hook you up with the right medical care anywhere instead of pot-luck recommendations from locals or the phone book.

IMHO I would require proof of DAN insurance before issuing a c-card to anyone. Sort of like car insurance and your drivers license. Of course along the same line I would like to see c-cards require periodic renewal / refresher courses. But that is in my little minded world.

 

[vladimir]

As this is an international board, it's worth pointing out that DAN in each region is an autonomous body offering its own insurance packages. These vary vastly between regions. All the above thread is about DAN Americas.

As far as I can see, the coverage offered by DAN Asia Pacific is substantially the same as that of DAN in the United States. The only differences I can see in a cursory inspection are differences in the death benefits and Australian benefits are denominated in Aussie Dollars as opposed to US Dollars. What did I miss?

 

[Coldwater_Canuck]

Relative to the cost of any diving accident DAN insurance is very cheap.

Well that argument can be made for any insurance: doesn't make extended warranties a good deal

But DAN does seem reasonable. While I assume it is a slight "ripoff" in that DAN probably takes back more than it costs them, I'm confident they are using any profits for useful things (the company as a whole is non-profit, different divisions will be either have a positive or negative on the bottom line).

With insurance I always look at how big is the risk. $100 mp3 player: Risk is $100, not worth the inherent ripoff that is insurance (sure, if something does go wrong, still good to have, but risk vs reward just isn't worth it). But a rental car, I grudgingly will get the loss-damage waiver, even though it is a massive ripoff and almost all profit for the companies, on the odd chance I total the car, I don't have $20,000 to give them.

DAN in my opinion is a good risk vs reward and the potentially excessive costs of treatment make it a must.

 

[peterbj7]

As far as I can see, the coverage offered by DAN Asia Pacific is substantially the same as that of DAN in the United States. The only differences I can see in a cursory inspection are differences in the death benefits and Australian benefits are denominated in Aussie Dollars as opposed to US Dollars. What did I miss?

No idea about Asia-Pacific, but Europe's cover used to be totally different from Americas'. Haven't checked since I last renewed my dive shop cover, which is getting on for two years ago now. For example, DAN Europe offered dive shop liability cover for all staff. DAN Americas has/had never offered that because in the US that was too open-ended.

Note also that DAN Americas cover is not the same wherever you are in the Americas. If you're in the US everything is available to you. If you're in (for example) Belize there are many restrictions, and it works out costing quite a lot more. Note also that you have to buy cover from your region - you are not permitted to buy another region's cover. I qualified for Europe and Americas as I had business bases in both places, but that's unusual.

I'm going to do the Americas-Europe comparison again.

 

[vladimir]

But DAN does seem reasonable. While I assume it is a slight "ripoff" in that DAN probably takes back more than it costs them, I'm confident they are using any profits for useful things (the company as a whole is non-profit, different divisions will be either have a positive or negative on the bottom line).

What they are using profits in their insurance division (a separate corporation) for is to enrich the shareholders. Nothing wrong with that, but they should, in my opinion, be a little bit more transparent about it. A lot of people have the same misapprehension that you do--that excess premium income goes to the non-profit DAN. That is not the case, although the for-profit DAN does make some contribution to the non-profit.

 

[peterbj7]

the company as a whole is non-profit, different divisions will be either have a positive or negative on the bottom line

Many people don't realise that "Non-Profit" is an almost meaningless term. Profit is measured after certain costs but before others, and it is easy to manipulate some of those costs to be either above or below the line. The key one is senior salaries. Taking a normal profit-making company as an example, if say the Board pays itself total salaries of $400k a year the displayed profit may be $600k and dividends may be paid out of that amount. If the Board pays itself $1m a year the reported profit will be nil. What they actually do depends largely on taxation, as tax rates on dividends are not the same as on earned income.

So the company may be "non-profit" making, but the directors may be paying themselves millions.

Research and development costs are another interesting way of fiddling the books, or should I say "of presenting the results".

 

[fisheyeview]

Many people don't realise that "Non-Profit" is an almost meaningless term. Profit is measured after certain costs but before others, and it is easy to manipulate some of those costs to be either above or below the line. The key one is senior salaries. Taking a normal profit-making company as an example, if say the Board pays itself total salaries of $400k a year the displayed profit may be $600k and dividends may be paid out of that amount. If the Board pays itself $1m a year the reported profit will be nil. What they actually do depends largely on taxation, as tax rates on dividends are not the same as on earned income.

So the company may be "non-profit" making, but the directors may be paying themselves millions.

Research and development costs are another interesting way of fiddling the books, or should I say "of presenting the results".

Here in the States "Not For Profit" means that no person profits from the company. It does not mean that the company can not show a profit. All income over and above expenses is investred back into the company. This does not mean that they do not pay salaries to the employees.

DAN does have full time employees, but a lot of the people doing work for them are volunteers. Per DAN's 2004 Financial Report 17% of expenses went to Administrative. This includes salaries. 24% of expenses were Member Services This means paying claims for chamber rides etc.

I don't know about the business you are in, but the one I work for employee salaries account for the largest expense we have.