Oops, shoulda checked those stands
- Thread starter nat55
- Start date
ooops!
Been there done that, but only $15K to repair, not $15M. (My boat is on the left, with the cover still intact)
Been there done that, but only $15K to repair, not $15M. (My boat is on the left, with the cover still intact)
We'd see a lot less of this phenomenon if we weren't forced to indemnify boat yards from liability. And I suspect they wouldn't be placed in such close proximity either. It's one of the only rental arrangements for which the lessor, who actually set up the boat for storage, isn't responsible for anything.
What happened Dave? Masts out. No precariously tall fin keels. Looks like good stands/cradles beneath the boats.
Your boat appears to have been on jack stands? 2 - 3 per side? Chains?
Was it wind or some other factor that caused the boats to tumble?
Tiny little propeller for such a huge boat....
Nat. They must have heard that crash all the way down in Port Clyde!
no rudder, it looks like they just tilted it to remove the rudder.
i thought you suppost to dig a hole to remove it
i thought you suppost to dig a hole to remove it
@TomY The proximal cause was a storm with ~ 40 mph winds. I don't think there was any one fatal flaw, it was a combination of several factors:
The boat faced NW and in close proximity to the barn. If you stood on the foredeck, there was no land between the boat and Toronto some 130 miles away. The wind no doubt hit the barn and buffeted the boat with apparent winds in excess of 50 mph.
The asphalt surface was solid, but not perfectly level. Water and ice may have gotten under the jack stands.
The cover added windage.
The number of jack stands was marginal. It was (and still is) a 30' boat that had 2 jack stands per side and one under the bow. The rule of thumb is one jack stand for every 8' of boat. We were on the edge.
The jack stands were not made by Brownell.
While I have no evidence, I believe the keel was not properly blocked. I believe it was only blocked in the middle in one place. Standard practice is to block the keel in 2 places fore and aft. This prevents the boat from rocking fore and aft on the blocking.
This was only the second year the marina was using jack stands, so they were inexperienced with them.
If I put all this together I think when the storm blew through the boat started rocking back and forth on the inadequate keel blocking which was made worse by the cover (more windage) and the proximity to the barn which caused more buffeting. Eventually one of the jack stands moved (probably due to the ice underneath) and failed. Then everything went to hell.
The marina and BoatUS insurance made it all right and except for an overworked (or procrastinating surveyor) The whole process was relatively painless and I only lost a couple of weeks of sailing.
I haven't seen a boat go over yet, but I did see a mast come down right between my boat and the one next to me. It hit the ground with a big whump. The crane operator was sitting in his cab, staring at the boat's owner with a WTF expression on his face. I had watched the owner pull the clevis pins on each shroud, until he pulled the last one and the mast started coming my way. I hit the deck (the cabin sole, actually) and then stuck my head out of the companionway to see the lifting eye of the crane swinging in mid air. I can only assume the owner's previous boat was keel stepped, and this one obviously wasn't. He must have thought the mast partners would hold the mast up while he attached the lifting eye.
"The vessel’s owner says the boatyard removed and destroyed evidence of what caused the boat to fall over. The lawsuit alleges that Lyman Morse has refused to acknowledge its responsibility."
I'm curious as to what can be "removed" as evidence of the cause.
It seems like a poor business decision on the part of Lyman Morse to not be right there with "We will take full responsibility and have your yacht good as new in no time." They achieve both a great reputation for their customer service and the excellent work they would certainly HAVE to do in the Vesper boat.
Here's a link to the Lyman Morse Website gallery page that highlights their excellent work on Vesper https://www.lymanmorse.com/refit-services/vesper/
-Will (Dragonfly)
I'm curious as to what can be "removed" as evidence of the cause.
It seems like a poor business decision on the part of Lyman Morse to not be right there with "We will take full responsibility and have your yacht good as new in no time." They achieve both a great reputation for their customer service and the excellent work they would certainly HAVE to do in the Vesper boat.
Here's a link to the Lyman Morse Website gallery page that highlights their excellent work on Vesper https://www.lymanmorse.com/refit-services/vesper/
-Will (Dragonfly)
Nat, the yard is very reputable - as you note. Mistakes happen even at the best operations so insurance covers that inevitable risk.
A yard working on a boat is clearly liable - responsible for the damage - for that boat during that work or storing.
The yards insurance will cover the damage.
The part I don't get is how did this turn into a lawsuit? The PR damage from this suit, which would seem easily avoidable between the parties, could cost more than the claim.
I'm inclined to give the accused in the suit the benefit of the doubt until both parties have had their say.
Last edited:
@TomY I don’t understand why you’re inclined to think the yard isn’t responsible. If they hauled the boat and placed all the stands, and the boat was under their control and care it seems logical that they should bear responsibility. Perhaps the weather was worse than forecast (I don’t know) but whether or not it’s “act of god” (and whether that changes anything) is one for the insurance lawyers and courts.
from the little we know by reading the newspaper blurb. i blame the captain of the vessel for not following through on his concerns. telling the yard his concerns , not demanding that the vessel be shored up and following through until the vessel was secured is on the vessel's captain.
you want to be paid as a captain, then do your job and keep the vessel out of harms way, no excuses
my $0.02
you want to be paid as a captain, then do your job and keep the vessel out of harms way, no excuses
my $0.02
Sorry, I think the yard is clearly liable-responsible for the damage, Larry. Weather, too few - more than ample jack stands, if the boat is in the yards hands, they have coverage for this unfortunate accident, I believe.
I'm curious why the claim turned into the suit?
I'm guessing the yard did something that caused the accident. The article says the owners are accusing the yard of removing and destroying evidence of the cause. Thus, not a storm, not too few jack stands, not poor placement. They knocked the boat over and the owners are saying their wrong doing is being denied by the yard.
-Will (Dragonfly)
-Will (Dragonfly)
15 million and the suit is seeking more than monetary damages. It’s not just repair my boat it is make me rich or richer as well punish the yard.
This will be an interesting case to follow.
This will be an interesting case to follow.
So, you arrange to put the boat on the hard for repair.. Why don't you drop the head sail? It only takes a little wind to get behind and underneath that wrap to upset the applecart....
Any of those scenarios may be so, Will. But what wouldn't the yards insurance not cover? If they have a liability policy, it would cover all loss, that caused by employees - even total ignorance.
If you fall asleep in your barkoliner with a cigarette, and your house burns down, your fire insurance covers.
on the upside, it's a good time to paint the bottom of the keel 