New boat issues

[Crazy Dave Condon]

Assuming the boat owned by Beneteau was in the Annapolis Sailboat Show, there were no injuries per reports as all four sailors were rescued. I will be speaking from the standpoint as a sailboat dealer or helping other dealers attending the Annapolis Shows for over 30 years and as a former insurance investigator handling litigation, I will make a few comments. My question was a thought provoking question. As a former investigator, I would err on the side of the details if ever posted plus no injuries; thus the likely hood of any litigation is near non existent. However, how much responsibility is that of any skipper. We can suspect many things but until the details are in, I will not blame anyone.

However, questions must be asked to include who rigged the boat and the responsibility of that rigger and his company, who owned the boat at the time, who was being paid to bring the boat down and by whom, were the crew experienced and/or did something to cause the demasting, was this due to faulty equipment, who was responsible for inspecting the boat before that trip and if none, why, and finally was this an act of God? There are other questions but when a boat goes offshore, the captain of the ship is the overall responsible person for the safety of his crew and passengers as he is paid as a trained experienced expert.

I look forward to hearing what caused the demasting and until then will reserve any comments on blame.

 

[jon hansen]

there is no such thing as an "act of God" when it come to responsibility of a boat/ship accident. if anyone uses that term you will know that the scam is on. it is only used by scam artists trying to duck responsibility. total fraud statement.
this term was used about the sinking of the fitzgerald in 75' so that the insurance company and vessel owners could duck responsibility. you better believe that the back room payoffs were done to come up with this scam.

unless God signed on as the master of the vessel, he was not the ultimate reason for the accident.
only totally scary scammers try this defense.

this is just my opinion. take it's value for what you paid for it

 

[jon hansen]

...... God did it, you have to sue him. .....' ain't our fault '

 

[Crazy Dave Condon]

Jon;
An Act of God has been used for years by many to include insurance companies meaning no individual has control over an incident. A good example is a tornado that suddenly appears leaving very little time to prepare or escape when no one is at fault. What about sudden weather occurences that sailors are not held liable for? I ask questions but can assure you that is a term used by many good people but though there are a few scammers in any bunch. I saw a lot as an investigator. So we can agree to disagree

 

[jon hansen]

fair enough Dave. i have come to know here at sbo that your good people and have offered much help to many. i just wish that they would find a different term. i believe that the families of the fitzgerald crew got screwed. still bothers me.

i road that storm. the winds where i was were steady around 105 mph. i was the bosun on a very old laker that day. we fought very hard through out that storm to stay afloat. i was sailing with a highly skilled captain, thank God

 

[Crazy Dave Condon]

Jon;
Often we do not know what the circumstances are and I understand and feel what you said. Anyone who rode thru that storm went thru hell. I do not know what really happened to the Fitzgerald but any reputable insurance carrier would have paid. Sounds like there was an adjuster who for lack of terms was a rotten apple in a barrel trying to make a name for himself but not true for most insurance carriers. I am grateful to God that you were alive and able to talk about it. I am not sure you would want to share what happened and what you did to remain alive as that is very personal but any suggestions to sailors caught in a storm of that magnitude to prepare in an emergency would be appreciated. I too have learned from the forum as well even though I am a retired boat dealer. Thank you my friend for advising.
dave

 

[Will Gilmore]

Jon, for the purpose of sailing, one expects the sailor's to understand the risks and take appropriate action against them. Thus, for weather incidents at sea, I agree, there are no "acts of God". However, if a meteor sank the ship, this is so far outside of anyone's control or ability to avoid, that "act of God" is an appropriate term. In Florida, houses get lost to sink holes. It is, as far as I know, impossible to say when or where one might occur. However, it seems unreasonable to expect someone to avoid building a house in Florida because there might be a sink hole. The insurance companies are likely to call such a total loss of a house to such a phenomenon an "act of God", unless specifically addressed in the contract. I agree, "act of God" is often inappropriately used to avoid a payout. However, sometimes, it is the only answer.

-Will (Dragonfly)

 

[Crazy Dave Condon]

Will;
Thank you for sharing. It did not occur to me till you mentioned it.
Folks, when you get an insurance policy, read and ask the sales agent questions as to what is and what is not covered. That is very important. Thank you Will for bringing that up. BOY, I forgot about that being a numbskull for that. Call it old fartitis or just being crazy.

 

[jon hansen]

side note: by the time i was 14 i was aloud to take out my fathers sailboat with my buddies. i was in charge. it was the 38 ft. alden US one design.

sister photo. 7ft beam, no engine, no self bailing cockpit. she could out point everyone. carl alberg did the drawing at alden. she was a 'wet boat'
one of his rules that was imprinted into my brain was " i don't care if a meteor hits you, if you damage my boat you will never use it again"
tom young has a much better photo of a nice white one under sail.
for those that might think i was too young. my great grand father got his commercial great lakes masters license for sailing vessels at age 17. cargo schooners that his father built.

ok, back to "act of god". the US gov/coast guard deemed that such so the surviving families could not sue. it ain't just the insurance guys.

 

[Crazy Dave Condon]

Did your mother collect woekman’s compensation due to death?

 

[jssailem]

I think this is kinda the same thing.

I disagree there is a different standard of responsibility applied to a Captain/Skipper when master of a vessel. The duty is on the master. If the master assumes something he does not discharge his duty. He can not transfer the blame to another. The Law of the Sea has not been PC compatible. Maybe that will change in the future. Who knows. But I suspect not in my lifetime.

 

[Davidasailor26]

f the master assumes something he does not discharge his duty. He can not transfer the blame to another.

I'm interested in what the precedents are to back that up, and to what limit that responsibility can extend. To me it's unreasonable to expect that the "master" also be an expert in metallurgy, naval architecture, physics, meteorology, and all the other fields that are involved in maintaining and running a vessel. I would think (although I don't know) that the master's responsibility is to rely on those who are experts in those areas, and make the proper judgement and risk decisions based on the information they're given.

 

[jssailem]

To me it's unreasonable to expect that the "master" also be an expert in metallurgy, naval architecture, physics, meteorology, and all the other fields that are involved in maintaining and running a vessel

​

Not sure if these satisfies your query. They are the Wiki basic description. You might explore Admirilty Law for further clarity on the subject. (One of the challenges is the difference between Common Law and Admirality Law).

A sea captain, ship's captain, captain, master, or shipmaster, is a high-grade licensed mariner who holds ultimate command and responsibility of a merchant vessel.[1] The captain is responsible for the safe and efficient operation of the ship and its people and cargo, including its seaworthiness, safety and security, cargo operations, navigation, crew management, and legal compliance.[2]

Duties and functions
The captain ensures that the ship complies with local and international laws and complies also with company and flag state policies.[1] The captain is ultimately responsible, under the law, for aspects of operation such as the safe navigation of the ship,[3] its cleanliness and seaworthiness,[4] safe handling of all cargo,[5] management of all personnel,[6] inventory of ship's cash and stores,[7] and maintaining the ship's certificates and documentation.[8]

1. Aragon and Messner, 2001, p.3.
2. ^ IMO STCW Requirements for Masters
3. Aragon and Messner, 2001, p.4.
4. Aragon and Messner, 2001, p.5.
5. ^ Aragon and Messner, 2001, p.7.
6. ^ Aragon and Messner, 2001, p.7-11.
7. Aragon and Messner, 2001, p.11-12.
8. Aragon and Messner, 2001, p.13-15.

 

[uncledom]

I disagree there is a different standard of responsibility applied to a Captain/Skipper when master of a vessel. The duty is on the master. If the master assumes something he does not discharge his duty. He can not transfer the blame to another. The Law of the Sea has not been PC compatible. Maybe that will change in the future. Who knows. But I suspect not in my lifetime.

Just because he is the master of the ship does not make him God. He is not the mechanic and the rigger and the cook. He makes the decisions, he does not do all the jobs. At some point he delegates the specific task to the person he believes best qualified to do it. So if the rigger leaves out a cotter pin and he sent the rigger aloft to check for missing cotter pins he did not "miss seeing" a problem, the person he assigned did. It's just as easy to say it's the captain's fault as it is to say it's an act of God. I've never been a fan of first deciding blame and then finding out what happened and both "act of God" and "captain's fault" never flew with me. Although I believe the captain is responsible to make the best decisions he is not all things and must rely on others as well.

 

[jon hansen]

uncledom, if we use your logic, then the captain of the exxon valdez was of no blame. he gave the proper orders to a mate licensed by the us gov. the mate and helmsman, also with a gov. rating, hit the reef while the master was sleeping in his room.

welcome to maritime law.

maritime law sorta assumes that if the crew screws it up it's the captains fault for not training them properly.

 

[jssailem]

@uncledom while I understand and in part share your companssion for not wanting to “Blame” everyone or events that seem out of their control, who does. Maritime law does. Blame is apportioned undermaritime law. It is the conditions of the law that have allowed comerece to flourish between countries. It is global glue, so to speak. And it is harsh.

It is the law that impacts boat owners when they take their boat out onto the navigable waters of the United States or International waters. Harsh? Well yes. But it has survived many centuries of use. It is why preparation for going to sea is not taken lightly, yet many grab their boat keys and adventure out with out any knowledge of the responsibility they are burdened.

I’m not a lawyer Uncle Don... I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express once. And I do a bit of reading from time to time.

 

[uncledom]

@jssailem I watched white squall. I understand that the captain shoulders the weight. I have my 50 ton Masters. I just think it's a little too pat to say if the captain delegates to a qualified crewman that he is still completely at fault. Some people although qualified for their position may not be able to take the pressure of a given situation and that is something that is as unpredictable as the weather. Very little is as cut and dry as the "authorities" would have us believe. I think most things really are a series of unfortunate events.

 

[uncledom]

uncledom, if we use your logic, then the captain of the exxon valdez was of no blame. he gave the proper orders to a mate licensed by the us gov. the mate and helmsman, also with a gov. rating, hit the reef while the master was sleeping in his room.

welcome to maritime law.

maritime law sorta assumes that if the crew screws it up it's the captains fault for not training them properly.

If a crewman comes with a qualification why isn't he held to a standard and a fault? Isn't then the authority in charge of issuing such qualification at blame? I'm not a lawyer either so things that I believe are sensible are not sensible per law. Perhaps the laws need some tweaking.

 

[Crazy Dave Condon]

Ok folks , let’s not get testy here because we all should be aware as responsible sailors.
The main thing is to be aware making sure everyone is safe regardless of fault which was the best advice I received years ago.

However I had a few customers who did not derserve a sailboat. A good example is radar falling off a mast being blamed for due to faulty installation. Other things included fractured ribs, broken blocks and much more. Before going any further I insisted on a haul out even though Customer denied running aground. Coral/concrete/rebarb embedded in the hull, keel pulled from the hull, rippling in the hull/third of the rudder chunked out, etc. were the major thing. I asked the customer how much alcohol consumed and ramming speed he was going on a large boat. No respons. Denied warranty on that boat

 

[jssailem]

I think most things really are a series of unfortunate events.

Upon this we are in agreement. It is the small things that lead to bigger things. The reason that detail is important. Being a 50 ton Master you more then 99% know the burden of Master, though I suspect you do not dwell on that and you have a high expectation level of your Seamen. Further, that when you issue an order (when on the boat it is more likely an order not a suggestion) it will be carried out. Additionally, I suspect that you have individuals aboard that you trust. That this trust was earned. And that these trusted members of your crew carry out inspection of everyone’s work. It is the nature of a commercial ship and crew. If not carried out everyone can and sometimes pay a cost. It is the nature of man and usually the frailty.

I am not in that class of mariner as my career took a different path. Yet we both, when pushing away from the dock take on the same responsibility.
It is a reason that from time to time this discussion and others (like the ColRegs debates) are good for the members of the forum. We will all have opinions that are birthed in small events/experiences. It is frequently the atonement for our actions that calls us up short.