Boat almost sunk, not mine

[Tim R.]

My father in law was sailing his Etap 39 on Tuesday. When he arrived that day he noticed more water in the bilges than usual. He had previously changed out the speed transducer for the plug(something he does every time he leaves the boat) so he figured it was from that. He sailed the boat hard all day and spent the night. No problems wed morning when he left the boat. He gets a call from the marina on Thursday morning telling him his boat was sitting low in the water at the mooring and they found 3 ft. of water inside the cabin. They pumped it and hauled it for survey. A mechanic found a clear 1/2" hose connected to a thru hull with no seacock. The other end came disconnecedt from somewhere in the engine compartment but he did not know where. Surveyor will likely figure it out when he gets there.

The Etap has floatations foam as hull core and this boat can be completely holed without sinking. It could have been that the water did reach equilibrium at 3 ft. inside but am not sure.

Engine, batteries, woodwork, refrigeration, upholstery, wiring, etc all submerged. Probably totaled.

Anyone have any idea what this hose might have been for? I thought maybe a breather for a dripless shaft seal but I think this boat has a sail drive.

As for the story above, this was how it was related to me from my FIL who relies mainly on the yard for commissioning and maintenance,

 

[SenecaDaze]

I have a thru hull no longer used, was for icebox drain.
but has a seacock..

 

[Maine Sail]

A mechanic found a clear 1/2" hose connected to a thru hull with no seacock. The other end came disconnecedt from somewhere in the engine compartment but he did not know where. Surveyor will likely figure it out when he gets there.

#1 No Seacock

#2 Seacock left open (had to, no seacock)

#3 Clear PVC hose for below water is a HUGE NO NO. This hose is for fish tanks...

Your FIL has bad luck with boats.... Sorry to hear of his loss but at least he got to test the positive floatation of the ETAP....


Likely also had crappy, substandard perforated hose clamps.....


This one I found yesterday at about 2:00 PM on a 30 foot lobster boat. It was the ONLY hose clamp...

 

[Benny17441]

I guess someone took the "unsinkable" feature literally when deciding whether to fit a valve or not. Have had thru-hulls with no valves but they require a proper hose with double clamps at each end and frequent inspections. Keep wooden plugs attached with a fishing line. Beware of the backside of clamps as they may look new on one side and be rusted and broken on the other.

 

[Tim R.]

More info provided by father in law. Appr. 1" hose attached to a seacockt running vertical in engine compartment. Open end attached to bulkhead in engine compartment. Hose is clear reinforced hose that is attached to bulkhead using cheap nylon wire loom clamp. There are a couple 3/8" hoses that are loosely fed into the open end of the hose. One appears to be the fresh water cooling overflow tube. He was not sure what the other is. Camp came loose and open end of hose fell below waterline and flooded boat. FIL's surveyor claims design defect. Insurance stipulates no coverage for design defect. Insurance adjuster has not surveyed boat yet. No mention of this seacock or it's purpose in the owners manual. Engine is Volvo sail drive. This was a sinking waiting to happen although could have been prevented if seacock had been closed. Still could have easily occurred while sailing/motoring with seacock open. I have seen a photo of this arrangement but am hesitant to post here as thie situation will likely be litigated.

 

[Maine Sail]

More info provided by father in law. Appr. 1" hose attached to a seacockt running vertical in engine compartment. Open end attached to bulkhead in engine compartment. Hose is clear reinforced hose that is attached to bulkhead using cheap nylon wire loom clamp. There are a couple 3/8" hoses that are loosely fed into the open end of the hose. One appears to be the fresh water cooling overflow tube. He was not sure what the other is. Camp came loose and open end of hose fell below waterline and flooded boat. FIL's surveyor claims design defect. Insurance stipulates no coverage for design defect. Insurance adjuster has not surveyed boat yet. No mention of this seacock or it's purpose in the owners manual. Engine is Volvo sail drive. This was a sinking waiting to happen although could have been prevented if seacock had been closed. Still could have easily occurred while sailing/motoring with seacock open. I have seen a photo of this arrangement but am hesitant to post here as thie situation will likely be litigated.

This sort of begs the questions; what constitutes a design defect?

Does anything not meeting current safety standards, which surveyors survey to, make it a design defect? This factory seacock installation does not meet ABYC standards, by about 300+ pounds. Does this make it a design defect and the insurance company has an out?

I know they deny claims all day long based on "lack of proper maintenance", failed hose clamps, cracked hoses, leaking stuffing boxes etc., but design defect?

Wow! This really means the average boater needs to ensure their boat is done to the letter of the standards so the insurance company has no "out".... There are hundreds of thousands if not millions and millions of "design defects" out there that do not meet "industry accepted safety standards".....

I guess the real question would be; has your FIL undergone an insurance survey recently? Did his boat pass?

 

[JK_Boston_Catalina310]

Wow! This really means the average boater needs to ensure their boat is done to the letter of the standards so the insurance company has no "out".... There are hundreds of thousands if not millions and millions of "design defects" out there that do not meet "industry accepted safety standards".....

So this scares the hell out of me.

Here are a couple of pages from the most recent survey I had. If you combine the "design defects" out by insurance companies with the "good faith" language in the survey portion I attached (Smitty Survey 2) you could end up with a sunken boat that no one will pay you for even though you are carrying insurance.

Granted that would be kind of a perfect storm with the surveyor missing something that could be deemed a "design defect". But as a hypothetical, let's say the surveyor noticed that the propane locker drain dipped low on it's vent tube creating a low point that could fill with water and block flow. But instead of putting it in the survey he tries to be a nice guy and just tells the owner about it. Well that could lead to one of these perfect storms if the owner didn't fix it.

And on the insurance company looking for outs, look at recommendations No. 3 & 4 (on Smitty Survey 1). The surveyor who did this is someone that works extensively in my area doing insurance and refinancing surveys. I asked him to remove the "certified marine mechanic" lines and he said no, it's part of his standard language and goes into every survey report based on advice from a lawyer. Would this give insurance companies an out to deny coverage to anyone who does their own work? I have never had a professional do any of the work since I have owned this boat (last 4 years). I have done a fairly extensive list of upgrades and repairs and I would like to think I do a good quality work. He even made a comment in the report "the engine appeared to be in good to very good condition with a dedicated and professional maintenance program evident". That's all my work he's talking about. The previous owner never even changed the impeller in 10 years of owning the boat. But does the "certified marine mechanic" recommendations give them another out?

 

[Ron20324]

...But does the "certified marine mechanic" recommendations give them another out?

It's like a pre-purchase home inspection where it says "all corrective work to be done by a licensed professional". Yeah, 100 bucks an hour to replace the outlet faceplate, etc.?

 

[Gunni]

The reference to the "Certified" mechanic is simply a protection for the surveyor making the recommendation. He wouldn't say, "have your incompetent buddy Richard" do the commissioning because that would be derelict. It also provides a recommendation that you hire a competent tradesman who will come with professional liability insurance that can be tapped in lieu of your own if there is a loss.

If you are qualified to do this work you can certainly do so and still retain insurance coverage. Just be aware that if there is a loss, they can inspect the cause, and if it is your work/your fault, it would jeopardize your claim. Basic risk management decision here.

Tim your FIL must avoid any attempt by the insurer to assign this to Etap, as they have changed hands / are gone.. and a subrogated claim against them by the insurer would be a mess. My argument would be that there was no "design flaw" there was an equipment failure (clamp) which caused the sinking. Quit talking to that jackleg surveyor and find a smarter one, he may have to provide opposing testimony against he dummy who called this equipment failure. I'm hoping FIL has a good insurance broker!

 

[Tim R.]

The reference to the "Certified" mechanic is simply a protection for the surveyor making the recommendation. He wouldn't say, "have your incompetent buddy Richard" do the commissioning because that would be derelict. It also provides a recommendation that you hire a competent tradesman who will come with professional liability insurance that can be tapped in lieu of your own if there is a loss. If you are qualified to do this work you can certainly do so and still retain insurance coverage. Just be aware that if there is a loss, they can inspect the cause, and if it is your work/your fault, it would jeopardize your claim. Basic risk management decision here. Tim your FIL must avoid any attempt by the insurer to assign this to Etap, as they have changed hands / are gone.. and a subrogated claim against them by the insurer would be a mess. My argument would be that there was no "design flaw" there was an equipment failure (clamp) which caused the sinking. Quit talking to that jackleg surveyor and find a smarter one, he may have to provide opposing testimony against he dummy who called this equipment failure. I'm hoping FIL has a good insurance broker!

FIL is prominent attorney. Unfortuanately this all could have been prevented if he simply closed the seacock when he left the boat. That does not fix a possible problem while under way but it could be argued.

 

[BobM]

Reason 593 to close every sea cock every time you leave the boat.

 

[Gunni]

FIL is prominent attorney. Unfortuanately this all could have been prevented if he simply closed the seacock when he left the boat. That does not fix a possible problem while under way but it could be argued.

Which makes it an accident not a design flaw. And failing to close a seacock is not negligent. There are many, many boats floating high in their slips with open seacocks all year round, including those with seawater tempered climate control. You can close the unused seacocks and you should conduct regular inspections of all thru-hulls but in the end stuff happens. That is what insurance is for.